Responding to anything in particular?
Right the fuck on!
I endorse this message.
fauxgessive...
loves it!!!!!
sorry, can't even spell my own new favorite word I'm so excited about it!
My name is Choey, and I heartily endorse this post by Melissa.
Of course, it should be obvious. It's sad that it's not.
Responding to anything in particular?
You mean, like every fucking conversation ever about Hillary Clinton?
Equal rights for women should be a given.
Sometimes I feel like you're reading my mind.
Well said. Can't be one without the other.
This has been another fabulous 5-second sum-up by Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain. It will be bookmarked and referred to nine nonillion comment-threads. So sayeth the Minster of Hug Dispensary.
"You mean, like every fucking conversation ever about Hillary Clinton?"
And rape. and DV. and sexism. and etc ad naseum
What is exactly is meant by feminism? Beyond the bumper sticker slogan "feminism means women are people too."
If I believe in equal rights, equal pay, oppose sexual harassment, and oppose sexism, is that enough to be a feminist and thus a "progressive"?
Or, must a person also support things that I morally cannot, such as the pro-choice position, to qualify? Just a question...
Just to clarify, if there was one particular fucking conversation about Hillary Clinton that inspired this post, I wanted to know about it so I could write some letters or something.
Quoth 99 million progressive dudes I know:
BUT BUT..!
There's no such thing as sexism!
Men have it worse than women!
Bitches are made for sex and cleaning!
Women are different from men and don't need freedom!
Also women say they hate being treated badly but really they love it!
Also women are never treated badly and just make it up because they hate men!
And- ACTUALLY- it's these evil evil man-hating feminists who are destroying the progressive movement!
You just have PMS.
God, women are so emotional and stupid. They can't function in politics.
So go make me a pie. *smack*
/snark.
I have concluded that a lot of these fauxgressive dudes (good one, btw) are kinda into rights for other men but really really want to still grind their bootheel into the bitches. Oh, and evopsych SAYS so it's all scientifically proven that they're right. I honestly don't know what will solve this issue other than a woman's party. Didn't all this shit go down in the 60s, too? Leftie groups only were really in it for men, women were just the unpaid cleaning and fucktoy staff?
Responding to anything in particular?
Everything and nothing, if you know what I mean.
Shorter Questioner:
Am I still a progressive even if I don't think women are human?
great post, by the way.
Or, must a person also support things that I morally cannot, such as the pro-choice position, to qualify? Just a question...
No, you cannot be a progressive if you believe that women do not have the authority over their own bodies. Pro-choice isn't forcing anyone to have an abortion, so you can be progressive and be personally opposed to abortion.
You just can't support legislating your personal moral choices so others are not free to make their own moral choices about what they are going to do with their own bodies.
I do know what you mean, Liss, and I feel it, too. Was just listening to a CD from Drop Bombz, which is a fauxgressive hip-hop group out of Atlanta. They probably think of themselves as feminists, but they use terms like "cooter" and "pussy" as slurs against other male rappers. They also use the word "faggots." So, while I agree with much of the anti-war sentiment in their tracks, I am definitely going to be calling them on some of the other shit on that CD.
it's sad that this has to be exclaimed, but exclaim we shall!
"Am I still a progressive even if I don't think women are human?"
Totally.
It does raise an possibly interesting question though: is the faux-life position inherently anti-feminist?
It's inherently anti-woman, imo, so it would have to be anti-feminist too.
Hells yes!
I love you. That is all.
Or, must a person also support things that I morally cannot, such as the pro-choice position, to qualify?
No.
Next question?
You're not a feminist if you're not pro-choice. It's not an optional extra. And you're not progressive if you're not feminist. Fucking period.
Thank you 'Liss, I totally agree with this.
That'll teach me to post when I've been working for a long-arse day ...
That "No" above, should read "Yes".
100% pro-choice here.
But I am interested... What do you think of groups such as "Feminists for Life" and "Democrats for Life?"
What do you think of groups such as "Feminists for Life" and "Democrats for Life?"
I think anyone who is in favor of legislation that rids me of my bodily autonomy is not a feminist and not a progressive.
Legalized abortion does not force anyone to have an abortion. That's why it's called choice.
It is truly disappointing to see some of the anti-feminist rantings on this blog. Women are the backbone of this nation and are still treated as either madonna's or whores. It is difficult to believe that we have raised the types of people who would respond in this obscene manner.
What do you think of groups such as "Feminists for Life" and "Democrats for Life?
The moment you start legislating your own personal moral choices of reproduction onto the bodies of women, you're no longer a feminist.
And I think 'Liss nicely summed up how you're not a progressive either.
But I am interested... What do you think of groups such as "Feminists for Life" and "Democrats for Life?"
Sarah | 04.08.08 - 3:24 pm | #
Everyone already got Questioner, so I'd say: the former are co-opting a term they have no right to, in an attempt to sway young women. The latter I couldn't care less about...but then, I'm a radical, not a progressive. 
Sarah, Amanda at Pandagon did an excellent multi-part takedown of "Feminists" for "Life" (each in quotes b/c they are not the first and they do not not support the second).
Thanks for the feedback! I'll definitely have to check out the link at Pandagon too...
Now, off to Google search!
Women's Party. Want. It. Now.
"pat johnson | 04.08.08 - 3:26 pm "
Pat musta gotten lost on way out of Kos or something.
Too late, I already got a progressive badge in the bottom of a box of Lucky Charms. I wanted a Dora the Explorer set of 3-D glasses, but you take what you can get.
Pat musta gotten lost on way out of Kos or something.
Unless I'm mistaken, Pat was talking about our trolls.
Pat musta gotten lost on way out of Kos or something.
Betty Vagynomite Boondoggle | 04.08.08 - 3:32 pm | #
Srsly. The only thing close to "obscene" was SiC's "Fucking period," which, if that gives one the vapors...ha!
Fuck fuck fuck fuck fuckety fucking fuck fuck!
Unless I'm mistaken, Pat was talking about our trolls.
Melissa McEwan | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 3:33 pm | #
Hmm, that makes sense.
I still like saying "fuck," tho'.
You're not a feminist if you're not pro-choice. It's not an optional extra.
This is flatly true. It's like saying, "Well, I'm for gay rights, I just don't think they should get married." If a woman can't control what goes on inside her own body, what liberty does she really have?
"Well, I'm for gay rights, I just don't think they should get married."
*nods* I think the allegory is right on point, Jeff. Either you think us queers are equal to straights and hence deserve marriage rights just as much as straight do, or you don't. And if you don't, then you're a bigot. It's really that simple.
Same thing with being pro-choice.
Y'know, it occurs to me Questioner thought she was trapping us in some clever ethical bind.
...Ha!
What about those who say you can’t be a real feminist (and therefore progressive) unless you vote for Hillary?
Nice straw woman, Dreary Urbanite. No one is saying that here.
What about those who say you can’t be a real feminist (and therefore progressive) unless you vote for Hillary?
Their opinion and they're entitled to it.
What about those who say you can’t be a real feminist (and therefore progressive) unless you vote for Hillary?
You mean those straw feminists blowing in the wind?
*standing and cheering for Melissa's post*
Kathy- good call. Progressivism is a political and social philosophy. It's a motivating consideration for voting choice, that's all.
Hey, I've got one! What about all those feminist who insist that all the men have to be sent to Monster Island and wear dresses and high heels?
What do you have to say to them?
"What about those who say you can’t be a real feminist (and therefore progressive) unless you vote for Hillary?"
They're probably Conservatives who momentarily forgot to include the phrase "uterus voting" in the sentence.
Hey, I've got one! What about all those feminist who insist that all the men have to be sent to Monster Island and wear dresses and high heels?
What do you have to say to them?
Sniper | 04.08.08 - 3:45 pm | #
"Get me a finished screenplay, and we'll talk."
"Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain"
Oh, hey that reminds me, I've been meaning to thank you for putting that phrase in my head. Some asshole street-harassed me a couple days ago, and I told him to go fuck himself, and he got all up in my face, all "Hey what's your problem BITCH?, and I was, all, "Bitch? Bitch? Sweetheart, I shot straight past 'bitch' at 19, and as far as you're concerned, I'm Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain, and your worst fucking nightmare."
And then he ran away, muttering to himself. So, thanks!
And onto topic: WERD. I feel like memo'ing this to Kos and HuffPo.
"Get me a finished screenplay, and we'll talk."
It's a reality show. We don't need no stinkin' screenplay.
who momentarily forgot to include the phrase "uterus voting" in the sentence.
Ahhh, but what is feminism? The term means lots of things to lots of people. You might want to define the term before using it to draw such deep lines in the sand.
I consider myself a progressive, but not a feminist (as a woman of color, I simply do not feel as if the mainstream feminist movement has made any room for me as anything other than seat filler.) Would I be proud to be called a womanist? Heck yeah!
Some asshole street-harassed me a couple days ago, and I told him to go fuck himself, and he got all up in my face, all "Hey what's your problem BITCH?, and I was, all, "Bitch? Bitch? Sweetheart, I shot straight past 'bitch' at 19, and as far as you're concerned, I'm Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain, and your worst fucking nightmare."
RKMK | 04.08.08 - 3:52 pm | #
You rock so much.
I am not a feminist...I believe myself to be a humanist.
When it comes to the topic of abortion, I believe 3 things:
1) Abortion should be Safe
2) Legal and acceptable, and
3) Rarely utilized.
I believe that ALL humans should have proper access to ALL contraceptive alternatives and proper education on the subject before becoming sexually active, and I believe that should a woman become pregnant, the decison on what to do with the regard to her pregnancy is hers and hers alone.
I'm sorry, but I refuse the label "Feminist". I prefer to see the fight for rights as equal regardless of sex, or sexual orientation.
I am a humanist. If you can't accept that within the club, so be it, but that is what I am.
"Ahhh, but what is feminism?"
It mean women should be held to the same standards, and afforded the same rights and privileges, as men. jesus, why is it so hard for people to understand this?
I'm sorry, but I refuse the label "Feminist". I prefer to see the fight for rights as equal regardless of sex, or sexual orientation.
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 3:56 pm | #
Ding ding ding...privilege!
Also, please see the Feminism 101 blog, which address the points you're making.
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 3:56 pm | #
OMG, I so rarely get to cross off the "I'm a humanist" square on my White Liberal College Dude bingo card!
Thanks, Jeff!
I prefer to see the fight for rights as equal regardless of sex, or sexual orientation.
Then you're a fucking feminist.
Get the fuck over yourself.
@rkmk I can steel ur smakdown?? kthx
as far as you're concerned, I'm Queen Cunt of Fuck Mountain, and your worst fucking nightmare
That's so going on the uniforms.
I prefer to see myself as a humanoalienist, as i believe all people, silicon based life forms, and beings composed entirely of energy should be treated equally.
/snark
for christs sake-feminism is not a toxic word..........
as a woman of color, I simply do not feel as if the mainstream feminist movement has made any room for me as anything other than seat filler
I do think this is a valid concern, and hell, the feminist movement DOES need to be called out on this shit.
However, as loath as I am to tell people of colour how to deal with their experiences of racism, I would suggest that perhaps the best strategy is not to divorce oneself from the term feminist, because that leaves it to be owned by the racists, but rather fight and force it to change as it should be.
You'll find the white feminists at this blog that will be very enthusiastic in joining you in that fight.
Just my thoughts mind you ... I'd be very proud to call you a fellow feminist ...
Feminism *is* humanism because WOMEN ARE PEOPLE. Without feminism, "humanism" is just male-centered multiculturalism, a concerted effort that all men everywhere, regardless of race, creed or culture, receive the full benefit of patriarchy.
In other words, "humanism" without feminism is bullshit.
@ Pizza Diavolo - Gracias!
@ shirky - You bet! I was cribbing Shakesville anyway.
Dear Jeff: Saying you support "humanism" without supporting feminism is like saying you support the practice of "medicine" but not "cardiology." It's not actually possible, as feminism IS humanism.
Er... that said, I totally see LadyS's point re: racism in the feminist movement.
Oh, but see, if you don't use "humanist", the men will be left out and we can't have that, men being so important and everything.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive.
Right the fuck on.
Personally, I'm an atomist. I believe that all things composed of atoms should have equal rights, and each atom should have equal rights, too.
I spent a short time identifying as a quarkist, but you could never count on anyone showing up for the meetings.
HELL yes. Can I quote this verbatim? I think as many people need to see it as possible.
I spent a short time identifying as a quarkist, but you could never count on anyone showing up for the meetings.
Well, that's because the meetings weren't discrete enough PD
I'm a Quarkist.
Fuck meetings.
Ahhh, but what is feminism? The term means lots of things to lots of people. You might want to define the term before using it to draw such deep lines in the sand.
Feminism, at its root definition, which isn't mine to change, is a belief in the equality of the sexes. And that's to what I'm referring in the post.
Which is separate from your very legitimate complaint about how feminism is often practiced.
Yes yes yes.
I agree in principle. But besides there being a blind spot relative to women of color, there is another blind spot 3 million strong, and that is the total neglect of the plight and issues of professional nurses.
I have tried to gain access to and support from the feminist and progressive blogospheres as a writer about professional nursing, patient advocacy and patient safety issues. I have yet to have a single influential blog owner/host respond.
You won't find liberal/feminist ads on my blogs because none of the hosts of those services returned emails.
As far as I'm concerned, the talking the talk is great, but I'm still crawling in the gutter, while the feminist and progressive blogospheres go on ignoring and ignorant of professional nursing demographics, issues and their impact on the public.
In no other profession is it still socially acceptable to stereotype, ridicule, condemn out of hand and expect subservience, obsequiousness and obedience, instead of professional autonomy, accountability and representative reportage across all forms of media. Well, there is close to zero reportage about nurses and nursing. Control f or search the terms, nurse and nursing on any healthcare story, blog or mainstream media health page.
Can you say preventable deaths and patient harm?
I spent a short time identifying as a quarkist, but you could never count on anyone showing up for the meetings.
Well, that's because the meetings weren't discrete enough PD
The numbers would have been hard to quantify, anyway.
Thanks for this post, Liss. Right on.
and that is the total neglect of the plight and issues of professional nurses.
Wah? How the hell is this relevant?
Please tell me this is a joke ...
I spent a short time identifying as a quarkist, but you could never count on anyone showing up for the meetings.
I'm a Higgs-Bosonist myself and I don't have any friends.
Wow... I'm both astonished and saddened that people struggle with this concept.
Glad you said it so poignantly.
I'm a Higgs-Bosonist myself and I don't have any friends.
Graham | 04.08.08 - 4:17 pm | #
I aspirated tea. I'd be pissed, but I'm too amused.
(Help! Someone tell me how to make the laughing face!)
: lol :
No spaces.
I spent a short time identifying as a quarkist, but you could never count on anyone showing up for the meetings.
Well, that's because the meetings weren't discrete enough PD
Besides, once you'd committed to a time and place wouldn't that have limited your options?
Besides, once you'd committed to a time and place wouldn't that have limited your options?
Well, the moment you realised they were there, they'd be moving on to the next place.
Yay, thanks Liss!
for Graham, and for RKMK, while I'm at it.
Besides, once you'd committed to a time and place wouldn't that have limited your options?
Well, the moment you realised they were there, they'd be moving on to the next place.
Actually, even when they DID show up -- Oh My God! The processing!
Sarah:
It's been a joke for far too long. The demographics: 94% of those three million nurses are women, and the feminist and progressive blogospheres has ignored them at best and joined in the collective use of them and have taken them for granted as the norm.
Until nurses and nursing are embraced by the feminist and progressive communities, I think that there is a fundamental disconnect on what is espoused as valued and what is practiced as expressed values.
I'm a Higgs-Bosonist myself and I don't have any friends.
I'm a Heisenbergian, and I can never be sure whether I have any friends.
Annie, feminism is the belief in equality of the sexes.
The ridicule and expected subservience of nurses that you describe in your comment, don't you think sexism plays a role in it? I would think it entirely in your own SELF-INTEREST as a nurse (and as a woman, duh!) to be a feminist.
So, really, I don't understand your post at all. Do you think OPPOSING feminism will actually improve the working conditions of nurses?
Annie, how do you want to be embraced? What professions do believe are already being embraced by feminism?
Until nurses and nursing are embraced by the feminist and progressive communities
But as I said above; how is this relevant to this thread? I seriously don't get it in the slightest.
So you think nurses haven't gotten enough attention. Join the fucking club. If you want, write a piece, submit it to Liss, and she'll make the decision about whether or not it's good enough to post on this site.
But I don't see in the slightest how on earth what you're bringing up is even remotely relevant here. Or even how the fuck it stops you from being feminist.
Oiy.
Feminism *is* humanism because WOMEN ARE PEOPLE. Without feminism, "humanism" is just male-centered multiculturalism, a concerted effort that all men everywhere, regardless of race, creed or culture, receive the full benefit of patriarchy.
Exactly. Here is a good article about the concept:
I became a Humanist when I was fifteen years old, at the same time I became a feminist. I must admit that it's difficult to separate the two and I have found that those who are true to Humanist principals are also feminists. Indeed it isn't possible to be a Humanist without also being a feminist. Both philosophies abhor inequality, injustice, and advocate egalitarianism. As a matter of fact, I think the feminist community has a natural kinship to the Humanist community because both "isms" deeply regret and make every effort to deny the intrusion of patriarchal religion on our lives.
Love. This. Post.
I'm a Heisenbergian, and I can never be sure whether I have any friends.
Well, I'm a tach ...
... yon.
I also should add that I come from a very poor background. My mother was involved in the feminist movement in the early 1970s. All the women around her were middle-class, and they treated my mother like she was a piece of dog shit at the bottom of their shoes.
But I am a feminist.
Why? Even though these class and race issues are far from resolved? Even though feminists were mean as hell to my mother? Why?
Sorry, gotta shout it...
BECAUSE I'M A FUCKING WOMAN AND I AM EQUAL NO MATTER WHAT THIS SICK, SEXIST CULTURE TELLS ME AND I'D BE A FOOL NOT TO SUPPORT MY OWN EQUALITY!!!
And Annie, if you don't support your own equality, not only do you betray yourself but you give nothing to your fellow nurses either.
P.S. Great post Melissa! Shakesville is smokin' hot these days!
Way to bash with a cluestick Liss.
People only worry about feminism if they don't have a job. Otherwise, they are trying to fight class hatred & discrimination every day. It's hard to be a philosopher, during these days of stereotyping.
I think I've seen Annie on another thread talking about nurses.
Annie, I totally believe you, nurses certainly experience a specific occupational kind of discrimination, as do teachers, and air hostesses, and so forth. Those issues definitely deserve attention. But if you want to blogwhore, do it in the blogwhore threads - there are three a week! Otherwise, it's just thread derailment.
Annie, the whole reason nurses don't get a lot of respect is because the field is female dominated. Feminism is about more respect for ALL women. That includes nurses. See how that works?
Oh, Hell YES!!!!!!!
J.B. Washburn is coldH2Owi from yesterday's thread -- you know, the one who told us all to "breath and realize that all is impermanent".
Good to know, for those of you who hate getting troll-snot on you.
Hey, I've got one! What about all those feminist who insist that all the men have to be sent to Monster Island and wear dresses and high heels?
What do you have to say to them?
Sniper | 04.08.08 - 3:45 pm
fuck, that sounds AWESOME!! i TOTALLY want to put on a dress and high heels and go someplace called Monster Island!
but only if there is a modest stipend involved.
Awesome post.
w00t.
Weren't Quarkists people who showed up in the bar in Deep Space Nine?
Seriously great post Melissa.
I'm a Heisenbergian, and I can never be sure whether I have any friends.
I'm a string theorist zombie, always wandering around and moaning "Braaaaaanes..."
This post needs a warning:
Contains win or win-related materials.
Also, I want to throw in a little bell hooks to help address the complications with feminism, like LadyS's good point about womanism, and the controversy elsewhere (Feminism 101?) about whether men can be feminists or allies.
bell hooks also writes that you can't be for social justice if you're not for feminism. But, she says, if you're not comfortable saying "I'm a feminist!" then try "I advocate feminism." It's not just semantics... there can be a world of difference between supporting a movement and self-identifying with it.
But the bottom line is that you cannot be progressive if you don't at least acknowledge that there is a need and a place for feminism within progressive politics. This post makes that point succintly and well.
I've changed my allegiance to the Exotic Baryonites.
I may not exist, but at least I'm stable.
Delurking to say I love you Melissa. LOVE.
Feminism is a broad movement and can certainly make room for professional nurses. There are any number of issues that a person can care about and still consider oneself a feminist. I've been focused on issues of the disabled for awhile because, well, duh, I live with a disability myself. You don't see much writing on disability on mainstream blogs, and when there is any, it often reeks of privilege and misunderstanding -- but that doesn't mean that feminism is therefore antithetical to caring about the disabled. It just means we all have a lot to learn, and those of us who feel ignored need to raise our voices so that we can have our seat with everyone else.
Annie, I hope you will continue to read this site, as well as other feminist sites. I hope you'll write about the issues that are closest to your heart. I hope you'll contribute to the movement as a whole. Because you're certainly a part of it -- your analysis of your issue would be correctly termed "feminist" after all.
Also the quark jokes are strangely charming.
As far as this post goes, I only wish it didn't need to be written.
Tanglethis | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 5:07 pm |
Great point; I'm a big fan of overlapping political movements and alliance-style organizing as a force for social change. And of bell hooks, I've learned a lot from reading her work.
Also? Feminist physics geeks are teh hotness. srsly.
Arriving late to the physics party, but had to respond:
But I am interested... What do you think of groups such as "Feminists for Life" and "Democrats for Life?"
I think the fact that they spend all their time arguing why feminists and Democrats should be pro-life, and not why pro-lifers should be feminists or Democrats, betrays their true intention.
That goes for "libertarian feminists" too.
Annie,
As the great-niece of a WWII nurse (and stout feminist) who helped revolutionize the nursing profession in Canada (insisting that nurses ought to have medical training - that not only were women mentally capable of receiving medical training and contributing more to the medical community than fluffing pillows and serving meals, but that these medically-trained nurses were essential to overall public health and the practice of modern medicine... what the fuck are you on about?
Feminists aren't nurse's allies? When we constantly talk about how work that is traditionally performed by women is habitually disregarded as less valuable than that dominated by men? We might not be mentioning you by name, but feminists are far more likely to be your allies than most political factions.
RKMK and Anne- or in some cases, feminists *are* nurses.
I'm sorry to butt in here, but Maura pointed me to the conversation and though I'm baffled by the "feminists don't work?????" thing, I do want to say that the strides nurses have maid since being powerless scapegoats has greatly to do with feminism, as well as Unionization.
Let's get a deck of -ism's and play canasta!
Damn straight.
Made, not Maid. grrr.
Oh to the yeah! This post is cupcake-worthy, it is.
I prefer to see the fight for rights as equal regardless of sex, or sexual orientation.
Then you're a fucking feminist.
Get the fuck over yourself.
Sarah in Chicago | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 3:58 pm | #
Wow...Thanks for being so non-judgmental and open to other people's opinions, Sue.
I have to say, this almost tops your "fried chicken and watermelon" snark from yesterday...almost.
If that's the way you treat others, please count me out of your future reindeer games.
XOXOX - Jeff
Hey, I've got one! What about all those feminist who insist that all the men have to be sent to Monster Island and wear dresses and high heels?
What do you have to say to them?
Sniper | 04.08.08 - 3:45 pm |
I'd say so long as we keep Candy Apple Island for ourselves, I don't much care.
Just curious - is it possible to be a feminist and still prefer Obama for president?
Jeff, can a person be a humanist without being for women's equality?
If your answer is "no", then you're a feminist.
If you're answer is "yes", then a) you're not actually a humanist or b) you don't believe women are fully human.
Dear non-existent God, I love this blog.
Rock on.
kim - this isn't about presidential candidates, it's about the treatment of all women. There is no reason to think that a feminist has to vote for a woman; the point is that dismissing a woman candidate solely because she is a woman is wrong.
"You mean, like every fucking conversation ever about Hillary Clinton?"
And rape. and DV. and sexism. and etc ad naseum
Betty Vagynomite Boondoggle | 04.08.08 - 3:11 pm | #
Baaaaasically.
And I'd like to add myself to the chorus of "Yes, indeed!"s going on here.
You can't be a racist progressive; likewise you can't be a sexist progressive. It just. Don't. Work that way.
Humanism will replace feminism when patriarchy ceases to exist.
Hey Amandaw - you get a Valentine. That is awesome.
Just curious - is it possible to be a feminist and still prefer Obama for president?
Yes.
I didn't turn in my feminist credentials at the door when I worked for John Edwards, for fuck's sake.
Uh-huh.
You can't be a progressive and not for equal rights regardless of gender. Which means you have to be a feminist. Which means you have to be my brand of feminist. Which means you have to agree with whatever twaddle is being spouted today, regardless of actual merit or perspective.
And you can't be a progressive and a capitalist. Which means you have to be a socialist. Which means my brand of socialism. Which means you can't criticise the People's Republic of China.
How can you criticise the PRC and still call yourself a progressive? You must support exploitative, crony capitalism!
How can you criticise [insert occasional misandrogynic bullshit] and still call yourself a progressive? You must be an anti-feminist!
Kim, if a feminist applies his or her lens to the issues and judgment of the candidate's ability to lead, and they they then pull the lever for Obama, then yes.
I hear this a lot in camps these days.. you can't vote for so-n-so if you're a *real* progressive because.... and actually, i can, and it's my conscience and my consistency.
And then PiaToR swooped in with a very special straw feminism.
I totally approve this message! Right on!
"If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive."
Intolerant, dogmatic and fascistic in only 9 words.
Impressive.
When did Progressives make you the taste maker of what is and is not a Progressive, Melissa?
Which means you have to be my brand of feminist.
You went completely off the fucking rails right there, PiatoR. I said no such thing.
But it's interesting (when "interesting" means "totally predictable") that you managed to read some bit of fascism into my post.
When did Progressives make you the taste maker of what is and is not a Progressive, Melissa?
What is it about the word "progress" that you don't understand, asshole?
I say! well said!
Either you think us queers are equal to straights and hence deserve marriage rights just as much as straight do
More than equal IMO
correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of a gay arranged marriage, or gays getting married in order to uphold their class status (as many English 'nobility' still do).
Everyone has dealt ably with the "humanists," but I still can't resist the urge to pimp this fabulous and relevant essay, Yes, You Are, by Sarah Bunting (of Television Without Pity fame).
I now return you to your regular programming, "Melissa Rocks Out Loud," already in progress.
"The position of women in this movement is prone."
I'll give SNCC bad guy his due....at least his statement, even if, as some say, was in humor, was honest.
that statement from the 1960s can still apply today. go to most of the political meetings, find men dominating. read a list of fortune 500 company heads, it's raining men.
I make the mistake of assuming that
men who work on so called progressive politics, gay men, men of color, are automatically good on women's issues. it's automatic in me to assume the best because of their support or challenges. it's prejudiced of me to assume they would be good.
cause often they are not. and, as evidenced by some women posting here, and many women bashing hillary for some really stupid things (her looks, staying with her husband, etc.) my gender needs more work too.
thanks melissa for your leadership.
Fucking brilliant, Q.C. of F.M. Most awesome.
Jeff (not Jeff Fecke), the reindeer games can continue quite happily without you, and the late 90's called and wants their hip slang back. (Yes, I know the "the [decade] called and wants its [phenomenon] back" is also a late 90's formulation. It's called irony, bitchez.)
Gotz to love teh new definition of "fascism" as "asserting the humanity of all the human race, not just half." Glad to see the wisdom of Jonah Goldberg is trickling down to the masses.
YAY!!! I'm really and totally delurking today. This post sums up why I love this sight so much. I keep reading it loud to my sister, the commenters and Melissa say what I am thinking but cannot articulate. And to the new trollers, seriously the word is progress. You cannot be a supporter if you do not believe in the equality of ALL people. It truly is not fascist or complicated.
Seriously, dewd, if you can't wrap yourself around women's desire to be considered fully human, how progressive could you possibly be?
It's kind of a minimum standard.
What is it about the word "progress" that you don't understand, asshole?
Abundant prior data loudly answers this question with, "PRETTY MUCH FUCKING EVERYTHING."
Indeed. 
I love it.
I kind of want to say something implicit in the fabulousness, though.
No matter how much you laugh and sneer at the right wing for its antifeminism, if you do so because it is politically expedient and not because you are a feminist who cares about women's equality, you are not a progressive.
Because I feel like that's kind of a thing - I'm pro-choice, look at me make fun of the pro-life crazies, look at my liberal cred! The idea of handing out cookies for not waving a freaking fake dead fetus outside of a PP is a no-go.
You know, for a progressive.
What is it about the word "progress" that you don't understand, asshole?
I still love you. That is all.
haloscan ate my last comment...
i don't comment much but i love this blog and read it every day.
you fuckin' rock.
Sarah in Chicago | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 3:58 pm | #
Wow...Thanks for being so non-judgmental and open to other people's opinions, Sue.
I'm just kinda curious when precisely Jeff decided I changed my name to Sue.
But, in case you couldn't figure basic shit out there, Jeff, let me direct you to the awesomeness that is 'Liss:
What is it about the word "progress" that you don't understand, asshole?
Boo. Yah.
Abundant prior data loudly answers this question with, "PRETTY MUCH FUCKING EVERYTHING."
Oh, and PiaToR hon, you know I like you, but you know those times when you don't have anything to contribute?
Yeah, STFU.
Also, let me repeat what fishboots said:
If you can't wrap yourself around women's desire to be considered fully human, how progressive could you possibly be?
It's kind of a minimum standard.
Absolutely bang-on correct.
What does one's belief or lack thereof in capitalism have to do with this post?
Intolerant, dogmatic and fascistic in only 9 words.
Impressive.
Ah, jealousy rears its shiny pointed little head, Dewd.
hell, yes!
Isn't it amazing how few of the real ones are left standing? If we've learned anything this election cycle, it is that.
Once again, we witness the PiatoR two-step: Open mouth, insert foot.
If that's the way you treat others, please count me out of your future reindeer games.
XOXOX - Jeff
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 5:33 pm | #
Stop being a discredit to the name "Jeff." Warren Jeffs and Jeff Bingaman have already done enough damage.
You know why people told you to get the fuck over yourself? Because you need to get the fuck over yourself. "Humanist." Bah. If men and women were both equally oppressed, then maybe that would make some sense.
We aren't. Don't get me wrong, The Patriarchy Hurts Everyone®, but it hurts women more than it hurts men, and anyone who thinks otherwise is either willfully blind or a misogynist.
If you believe the genders should be equal, then you're a feminist or a feminist ally. Full stop. You're a feminist because you believe that the cause that women have been struggling with for generations is a worthwhile one, and that cause is worth furthering. That cause is called feminism. If men had, of our own accord, started working to ensure gender equality all by ourselves, then we could call the thing humanism. We didn't. Women had to pry every right they have from men. Women built feminism, and they named feminism, and neither you nor I nor anyone has the right to quibble with that name. It was earned with women's sweat and blood and tears. It is feminism because its very creation was feminine. If you don't like that, blame your forefathers. They're the ones who failed your dreams of humanism, not women.
And if you can't deal with the fact that women get top billing in feminism? Grow the fuck up. So not everything in the world is geared toward men. Now you know how women feel 100% of the time.
What Jeff(Fecke) said.
As we Friends say, "This Friend (Melissa) speaks to my condition."
No matter how much you laugh and sneer at the right wing for its antifeminism, if you do so because it is politically expedient and not because you are a feminist who cares about women's equality, you are not a progressive.
This is the antithesis of the right, which cares about women's rights when they're at stake in countries they want to bomb, but not so much when they're rights that women they know could have. Feminism isn't a convenient tool to whack the right with.
Dr. Awesome--Thank you for remembering us silicon-based life forms. Too many of our carbon-based peers take us for granite, but I marble at your tolerance, and that's no schist.
Thank you, Jeff Fecke -- that was EXACTLY the kind of support I want from other feminists (especially feminists with penises 
)
Lt. Naraht | 04.08.08 - 6:39 pm | #
I love it when people on teh interwebz can be so gneiss to each other.
@Tanglethis
Great bell hooks quote, and great point in general. This thread and the mention of hooks is making me want to go read some womanist literature...
I definitely agree with you and all those upthread who have made the point that we should differentiate between the very valid theories behind feminism and the less perfect real life practices of the movement. Real life and real emotions tend to get in the way of such ideals though, and for me, it grates to feel ignored/marginalized within a purported safe space.
And of course, for every feminist who is oblivious to the complicated position of WOC in the movement, there's one who is all too happy to have an honest dialogue on such issues. One of the reasons why I've become a mega-lurker here at Shakesville is that folks here tend to really get these things or at least try to see both sides of the coin.
it grates to feel ignored/marginalized within a purported safe space
I am genuinely sorry to have made you feel that way, LadyS. I'm not sure sometimes how to balance what I feel is necessary brevity for clarity's sake with inclusiveness.
FWIW, it's not intentional, and I am aware of it, and I do care.
Just curious - is it possible to be a feminist and still prefer Obama for president?
Yes.
I didn't turn in my feminist credentials at the door when I worked for John Edwards, for fuck's sake.
Melissa McEwan | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 5:46 pm | #
And this is why Liss pwnz dah ooniverse.
To put my own spin on it:
Women have brains, if that brain says Barrack is the better choice for you as a candidate, then thats who you should vote for.
I mean hell, I'm a male feminist, if I can be that, I'm more than sure a feminist can vote for a man without the world ending.
The main thing one can't do is try to tear Hillary down just for being female. There's plenty of issues one can actually poke at in both her and Obama's closet; but just as no one should stand for racist intonation against Obama, no one, even those who don't agree with her, should stand for sexist comments directed at Clinton.
I prefer Barrack for a fair number of my own reasons; but I'll more than happily stand up for Hillary when she's attacked on the grounds of "omg she's got a vagina!" (But then I'll (grudgingly perhaps) stand up even for Ann Coulter when that happens. Though I may have to choke back vomit in the process.)
In my roundabout way, the thing I'm saying, something that this blog especially has opened my eyes to more than ever before; is that Feminism isn't about bra-burning or not shaving or hating men or anything like that:
Feminism is about leveling the social playing field so that instead of it being slanted in favor of men, a person of either gender can stand and be counted solely on the merits of their actions; rather than what's between their legs.
Feminism is about breaking ingrained cultural boundaries that hurt all of us with their false beliefs about femininity, women, and gender roles.
To be a feminist is to support a healthier and more fully realized humanity than we've known so far. To be a feminist is nothing less than to be just one of many with a revolutionary cause intricately related to every other progressive cause.
Without feminism, equality can't be had; and without equality, progressivism is as empty and hollow for most people as conservativism is.
Intolerant, dogmatic and fascistic in only 9 words.
Impressive.
Wow. Where on earth does insisting that women are human = facism? Some other planet? Or maybe on Monster Island, where you clearly belong.
Agreed. If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive. That's a very, very nice formulation, but's it's a little limited.
As I see it, we're all in this fight together. The patriarchy, particularly the Republican, Christian version of Patriarchy we have here in the US wants to take everyone who isn't rich, white, Christian, and in their corner, and either enslave them (crappy wage slavery and housewifery included in the term "enslave") or waterboard them. Unless we all work together, we're doomed, because those folks are completely fucking nuts.
Let me revise, if I may:
"If you're not a feminist, pro-gay, pro-Black, pro-Hispanic, pro-Asian, pro-Union, pro-mutant, pro-child and pro-healthcare you're not a progressive."
And, once again, Apologist in a Time of Rapists has shown his colors.
Simply amazing.
Thanks, Liss.
JJohnson, I just wanted to say I love you.
Liss,
Noted and bookmarked for future reference.
Let me revise, if I may
No, you may not.
I was making a point about women's equality.
Sometimes I write posts about LGBTQ equality.
Sometimes I write posts about racial equality.
Sometimes I write posts about all three.
Sometimes I write posts about all the things you mentioned, individually or as a group.
But this post is not about those things.
That doesn't mean I suddenly stopped caring about those things.
It means I want to give particular attention to women's equality in this post, and, no, you may not revise it.
And thanks for that awesome response as well, Liss.
Liss, I've been feeling really overwhelmed and depressed since I watched the Clinton coverage clip yesterday.
So, THANK YOU for this. We might make it through all this after all. I really wasn't sure, yesterday.
Bravissima, Melissa!
Standing O.
Rock on
I am both sad and glad to report that as
an interviewee for a project for a women's studies class, I was the only woman who said she was proud to be a feminist. This happened only 6 months ago.
Okay you've got:
Feminists: Advocating equality with concentration on women's issues.
GLBT Rights Activists: Advocating equality with concentration on GLBT issus.
Men Rights Activists: Advocating equality with concentration on men's issues.
Various Race Activists: Advocating equality with concentration on racial issues.
And more activists than I can think of.
It seems to me that progressives, humanists, etc. would have to contend with all of these issues since they advocate equality but don't concentrate on a specific set of issues.
An old friends of mine who was very skilled at drawing reacted to people calling him an artist with something to the effect of, "I'm not an artist. Once I claim the title of artist I also take on all the assumptions and expectations of the title artist. I just like to draw." (And I'm sure you all can think of untrue and unfair assumptions, expectations, and accusations about all the activists I listed above.)
Question: I sometimes notice that by not proclaiming that I am a/an ________ activist or -ist title I get hit with with said labels. Why is that? Is it because their in a rush to judge me or what?
The comments were as great as the post, all except for DEWD who clearly pops in when they uncage him...
Dewd, WHY? Go play with the other glue eating kids, you clearly don't want to be here. You just like writing antagonistic things and running away.
We call your kind cowards where I come from, among other things...
GREAT POST 'LISS!
And the physics humor is awesome, and PortlyDyke cracks me up...
Sending this to my ex-husband (who thinks he's the bastion of liberalism ever since I cured him of Republicanism) with a quickness!
Question: I sometimes notice that by not proclaiming that I am a/an ________ activist or -ist title I get hit with with said labels. Why is that? Is it because their in a rush to judge me or what?
Danny | 04.08.08 - 8:38 pm | #
honestly danny, i think here it is because every time you show up on a thread, it is to spout mra-lite talking points.
also, "humanism" already has a definition, extant since the renaissance, which has very little to do with "feminism + dudes too". it is a specific type of scholarly approach that emphasizes the importance of ancient greek and roman culture, in contrast with scholasticism. that particular stupidity pisses me right the fuck off.
A plea for everyone:
Please, let's all step back, take a deep breath, and I ask everyone to put an end to the ad hominim attacks.
Sometimes it is good to remember that the best courtesy of posting is to never say anything in anger that you wouldn't say to someone's face. I stepped over that line with Sarah, and I apologize for doing it....If I offended others, my apology is extended, but I stand behind my original statement.
People...We all agree on the basic concept, I personally just choose not to apply a label to myself that selectivly represents one group in the struggle...a prominant group, but one group just the same. I feel it is exclusionary, and that is my reasoning.
People, We are ALL on this ride, and to Jeff Fecke, you are correct....not everyone is treated equally. However, my intent was NOT that "Men don't get a fair shake"...quite the opposite. Men have it easy. However, as I said, there are others who do not. Do I believe in and support women's rights? Of course I do. With my heart...but I also believe in rights of minorities, and rights of LGBT, and rights of non-citizens and rights of the disabled equally.
Do I agree with what Melissa is working to achieve here? Damn right I do. However, I feel that the best path to realization of the masses that ALL are equal is to apply a label that encompasses everyone, without exclusion. My opinion is just that...MINE, and it stands for me and me only.
You are entitled to disagree, but let's at least disagree with civility.
There is one thing I am sure of in this battle...We all think we are "progressive"? Not from the lot of the bile I've witnessed here this evening...me included. Some of the comments that were inflicted here tonight shame us all...There will never be progress if we continue to savage each other so mercilessly.
(stepping off the soapbox)
This post should be plastered everywhere in the progressive blogosphere. Early on, back in January during the entire tearing up media created crowstorm, a lot of blogs were willing to come out and call bullshit on the media for their dogpile on Clinton. When she misstepped, sighs of relief were audible as now everyone was given permission to join in on the dogpile (i'm looking at YOU, Ballon Juice). The patronizing speeches to "drop out" for the past month were especially bad, considering I've fallen into THAT trap of sounding like a patronizing jerkfuck who nobly takes up the white man's burden of educating women what they have a right to be upset about.
I still hold out hope for reconciliation. What's so fucking frustrating is that if HRC or BO weren't running against each other, I KNOW the entire liberal blogosphere would be singing Kum-ba-ya together as we marched to our inevitable victory in the fall with our black or female candidate. But instead, we've turned to snark-on-snark violence as battle lines were drawn. I could rarely visit my favorite sites for fear of drive-by snarkings. And once the misogyny and racism poured forth, it was like we were waking up slowly from a Bush Hatred Orgy in bed with people we really don't know and we're getting a good look at for the first time.
So bravo to Melissa for pointing out the painfully obvious truth, and how easy and simple a conclusion it should be.
However, I feel that the best path to realization of the masses that ALL are equal is to apply a label that encompasses everyone, without exclusion.
Seriously, if the primary thing you took away from my post is that it's exclusive, because FOR ONE FUCKING POST I focused only on women, you have missed. the. point.
Although thanks very much for illustrating so goddamned perfectly why this post is necessary. Because with nearly FOUR YEARS of archives in which I have done my fucking best to be a regular champion on behalf of LGBTQ rights and racial equality, have tried to be sensitive to differently-abled Shakers, have invited all different kinds of people to contribute and guest post, and have tried to make amends when I've failed to be sensitive to the needs of any marginalized (or majority) population, I STILL CAN'T WRITE ONE POST JUST ABOUT WOMEN WITHOUT SOME FUCKING ASSHOLE WHINING THAT I'M BEING EXCLUSIVE.
And if you don't get why ignoring three+ years of archives to WHINE about this one post being exclusive makes you an asshole, I really can't help you.
Melissa, I choose to refer to myself as a humanist. That is my choice. I do not attack anyone on the basis of their selection of the term feminist, and I do not appreciate being savaged for my choice in nomenclature. You ARE a champion for all causes, and this is your sandbox. I fully expect you to speak your mind...I'd be disappointed if you didn't.
I just don't appreciate being beaten for chosing my own discriptive.
Lit3Bolt | 04.08.08 - 9:24 pm | #
*noddage*
Jeff, I'd like to point out that telling me advocating on behalf of women's equality specifically is exclusive of people of color, or LGBTQs, or the disabled, or the poor, or members of unions, or fat people, or any other group is predicated on ignoring that half (give or take) of all those groups are women.
When I advocate for women, I advocate for all women: Black women, brown women, white women, tall women, short women, fat women, thin women, disabled women, abled women, old women, young women, women with children, childless women, healthy women, ill women, dwarf women, poor women, rich women, middle class women, employed women, unemployed women, immigrant women, women in other countries, English-speaking women, non-English-speaking women, progressive women, conservative women, women in unions, women in comas, straight women, lesbian women, bisexual women, trans women, powerful women, weak women, vegan woman, vegetarian women, meat-eating women, religious women, atheist women, agnostic women, educated women, uneducated women, women who have survived rape, women who want my advocacy, women who don't, and every other conceivable expression, intersectionality, and experience of womanhood that exists on the planet.
So when you say to me, "But what about all these other groups?" my response is that ALL THOSE OTHER GROUPS ARE REPRESENTED AMONG WOMEN, so what you're really saying, in the end, is "But what about the MENZ?!"
So your very, very fancy veil of humanism isn't impressing me -- because it's quite apparent that you haven't even considered that what you're saying is predicated on failing utterly to respect the breadth of experience among women, who, last I checked, were human.
I just don't appreciate being beaten for chosing my own discriptive.
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 9:44 pm | #
Are you really so tone-deaf that you don't understand how coming into a thread championing feminism to explain that "no no, I'm a humanist" would, at best, be construed as entirely irrelevant, and much more likely, as a condescending lecture?
Oh, and per the usual, massive love for you and your teaspoon, Liss.
honestly danny, i think here it is because every time you show up on a thread, it is to spout mra-lite talking points.
I didn't realize that trying to understand someone was mra-lite. Melissa (and other people here) are putting their feet down and saying that to be progressive is to be feminist. I'm asking about the importance of labels Why are you trying to bait me?
also, "humanism" already has a definition, extant since the renaissance, which has very little to do with "feminism + dudes too". it is a specific type of scholarly approach that emphasizes the importance of ancient greek and roman culture, in contrast with scholasticism. that particular stupidity pisses me right the fuck off.
That's more like it.
The legacy of feminism:
LJ | 04.08.08 - 10:07 pm | #
LJ is an asshole who links to gory pictures without any warning text.
LJ is Randyson, Shakesville's most persistent and most stupid troll.
His bullshit will be deleted.
LJ is Randyson, Shakesville's most persistent and most stupid troll.
His bullshit will be deleted.
Melissa McEwan | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 10:11 pm | #
Oh, I remember him and his particular incoherent brand of idiocy from his original handle.
Still sliming his way around IP bans, huh?
Yep.
I hear a shallow tub of beer is good for luring slugs away and drowning them.
I just don't appreciate being beaten for chosing my own discriptive.
You're not.
You're being beaten down because you came into a thread about the inherency of feminism to progressivism and proclaimed "BUT WHAT ABOUT MEEEEE?????!!!!". You were beaten down because you act like a douche.
Sure, you're perfectly within your right to have an opinion. Go right ahead. However, don't expect that to translate to respect for the opinion if it is a dumbarse opinion, which yours IS.
I'm sorry, you don't get respect for having an opinion. You get respect for having a well reasoned and reality-based opinion. And if you don't, then you get respect for recognising that maybe you should just STFU. Discretion the better part of valour, and all that.
Your 'definition' of what it means to be a "humanist" is nonsensical. And to argue that Melissa is being "exclusive" is just the height of a continuation of said stupidity.
Your opinion is shite; THAT'S why you're being given shit. And seriously, I don't appreciate being lectured about my language by a condescending douche who can actually thread a well reasoned opinion together.
So your very, very fancy veil of humanism isn't impressing me.
Melissa McEwan | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 9:53 pm | #
My goal wasn't to impress anyone. It was simply to express an opinion on the discussion, and to open dialogue in an attempt to understand and hopefully learn from the opinions of others. If that makes me an "asshole" in your opinion, then that is something I'll have to accept....but it will NOT in any way change the great respect I have for you or the job you do, Liss. You are passionate in your defense of others. Always have been, and I hope you always will be.
I hear a shallow tub of beer is good for luring slugs away and drowning them.
!
I have it on good authority (from a terrestrial malacologist no less) that this is indeed true.
The only problem is then you're stuck with a tub of dead slugs floating around in skunked beer.
Like, ew.
I'm asking about the importance of labels
Because language matters. Because how we craft the meaning of something starts with how we talk about it. Because to control labels is to control power. To have the ability to frame how you speak is the essence of articulation.
And because, labels in our culture have strength and power, and will for the foreseeable future. Either we have a measure of power in those labels, or others have that power over us.
Words matter.
Like, ew.
Word!
My goal wasn't to impress anyone. It was simply to express an opinion on the discussion, and to open dialogue in an attempt to understand and hopefully learn from the opinions of others.
No, actually -- it was to accuse me of not being as accommodating of men as you would like, as I have amply demonstrated by deconstructing your comments.
That's not "expressing an opinion" and it's not "opening a dialogue" and it's not an attempt either to understand or to learn.
And your patent refusal to acknowledge the role you're playing as a "But What About Meeee?!" thread hijacker, which is not only voraciously self-centered but totally antithetical to the grand inclusivity you purport to espouse, does indeed make you an asshole in my opinion.
I daresay, given the level of literacy at this site, I'm probably not the only one.
I do not attack anyone on the basis of their selection of the term feminist,
Patently false. You do, because that's what you're doing right now. By running in here and giving a great hue and cry about how you're a humanist, and that's superior, you are attacking people who call themselves feminist.
I daresay, given the level of literacy at this site, I'm probably not the only one.
Spot on, I say! Well done giving that callow slicker a thoroughgoing drubbing!
Thanks, Grumbles!
Jeff, I command you to go back, and read what you have posted. Please. I did the EXACT same thing when I first came to this site, and all you're doing is mental masturbation. You're not really arguing, you have no point, then when almost 50 people are like, "um, stfu" you come in with a long mea culpa that wins awards for mawkishness and the coveted missing the point completely award.
This is not to be mean or an ad hominem attack (although I am polishing my snark on you...sorry). Things can be a little rough and tumble here, but before you reflexively post and argue your non-points, think a bit about what you're trying to say, who you're saying it to, and how they'll react. This was a post about feminism, which is equal rights for women. Attempting to redefine it to your tastes and pointing this out to everyone makes you look like a pretentious blowhard.
and make sure you look up "mawkishness" because that's exactly how your posts read, however well intended you think they are.
it is a specific type of scholarly approach that emphasizes the importance of ancient greek and roman culture, in contrast with scholasticism.
sophiefair | Homepage | 04.08.08 - 9:17 pm | #
Erasmus called. He wants his philosophy back.
Sarah in Chicago:
Because language matters. Because how we craft the meaning of something starts with how we talk about it. Because to control labels is to control power. To have the ability to frame how you speak is the essence of articulation.
And because, labels in our culture have strength and power, and will for the foreseeable future. Either we have a measure of power in those labels, or others have that power over us.
Words matter.
Interesting. I think the part that I'm having trouble reconciling is that while labels have the power to help you articulate what you wish to convey they also have the power to limit. Of course its much easier to convey what you mean because you have full control but the power to limit is a bit trickier because then other people (and therefore different thoughts) come into play.
Feminism IS a form of humanism. Feminism works towards the fullest realization of the human being.
Humanists MUST be feminists, or else they are "humanist" for only half the humans.
I'm happy to call myself a feminist, despite my dangly bits. I understand why some men feel uncomfortable with the semantics. But much of that is due to ingrained patriarchal attitudes.
Women do it too: "I'm not a feminist, but I believe in equality for women." WTF is that? Say it loud, say it proud: You're a FEMINIST.
Go 'Liss! Go sisters! Go feminist bro's!
As others have said, the anti-feminist, heck, anti-WOMAN nature of the attacks on Hillary have got to be denounced.
I'm for Obama, but I'm not going to sit back and let people attack Hillary just because she's a woman.
There are plenty of OTHER reasons why someone can oppose Hillary Clinton, that have nothing to do with her gender. By all means, complain about her anemic health care program, her triangulation, her initial support for the Iraq War, her lack of new ideas, etc. whatever. But that misogynist b*sh-shit has got to go.
Yeah, mawkish, I love that word.
"If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive." Funny about that. After reading this blog yesterday, and responses to it, and to "progressives" who are mysgonists,
that's about what I thought.
Hells to the yes, as always, Liss.
I'm a freshman in a liberal arts college, and while there are some feminists on campus, it's so awkward to include the phrase "I'm feminist" at table conversation, because sophomoric, idiotic American culture has latched onto the most extreme and absurd images of women who have been previously labeled as "feminist." There are a lot of supposedly funny comments about hating men, not shaving legs, not wearing bras, and all that sort of stuff. I was shocked because I expected SO much better.
It's so funny to make some people realize that they are actually feminist, but never wanted to admit it because of the negative connotations of the POPULAR INTERPRETATION of the label. Fuck that.
I'm feminist. (And progressive.)
Right on. This is now the best post ever.
Which kind of feminist though?
Rad fem?
Sex positive?
Equity?
Women of Color?
Trans?
Marxist?
Jewish?
Christian?
Eco?
Pro-Life?
Socialist?
Third world?
Black?
Cause I know you hate some of these subtypes of feminism, and I know some of them hate you.
Also, what about feminists that demand sole custody, lobby against shared custody, and state that we can ignore problems of false accusations of rape, domestic violence and child abuse? Like NOW? Are they feminists, humanists, assholes, fucktards, or you?
sex positive | 04.09.08 - 1:02 am | #
Well, they're not trolling, fucktard MRAs, so they've got that going for them.
Of course I am feminist, though it isn't my main blogging emphasis. I read Shakesville because it helps me to understand perspectives I could not possibly know about from my own experiences, and cannot experience. Women are a majority and yet men have been ruling them by violence; this violence must end.
"I'm sorry, but I refuse the label "Feminist". I prefer to see the fight for rights as equal regardless of sex, or sexual orientation.
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 3:56 pm | #
Ding ding ding...privilege!"
Jeff (not Mr. Fecke), you see what happens when a Liberal Man refuses to toe the company line?
You are finding out in this thread that these women are not, nor ever were, your friends or allies. As soon as you diverge one iota from the ideology that they proscribe, you encounter massive criticism.
They are the furthest from 'tolerant' as is possible, and they will throw you under the bus in an instant if you dare to stand up for defining who and what you are to be labeled.
This is what they really think of you and all other Liberal Men, and given the opportunity their Hate and Intolerance will reveal itself.
I suggest a trip to niceguy's forum.
Oooh, Random Capitalization! The favored Trope of Douches!
Yes, saying that if you are not an ally of women, we will not be an ally of you ... um, devastating criticism there, Dewd. "They are not doormats! They wish their 'allies' to actually do something for them! Hence, they are full of hate!"
(P.S. It's "prescribe," not "proscribe.")
I suggest a trip to niceguy's forum.
I suggest YOU take a flying fuck through a rolling donut.
This is what they really think of you and all other Liberal Men, and given the opportunity their Hate and Intolerance will reveal itself.
Yes, indeedy, it sure is hateful to suggest that the word "feminist" is not meaningless, and that attempting to eliminate the word when talking in the context of gender equality is, well, fairly anti-feminist.
One thing I do know, Dewd, is that "these women" are certainly not your allies. They're your enemies. They don't believe in walking a step behind you. They don't believe in sitting back and letting the menfolk tell them how it should be. That isn't always fun if you're a man being told that you don't know what you're talking about, but so what? Life's not always comfortable. If you can't listen to people telling you you're wrong and think that might mean you could be wrong, then frankly, you're the furthest thing from progressive that there is. Because progressive liberals know that nobody has a monopoly on truth, not you, not me. And the only way any of us can get closer to the truth is to, once in a while, shut up and listen.
Dewd is a lost cause. The Jeff-who-is-not-me isn't. He is someone who's never tried to look at the world from outside his own perspective, and who would be shocked if he did. But he also seems like someone who could learn a thing or two if he realized that meant listening first, and then responding.
Jeff, srsly, nobody's perfect, and I've gotten in arguments here when I started talking first and listening second. It's easy to do. But take a step back, and read the thread. Because there's a whole lot of good information on what feminism is, and why it matters that it is feminism, not "humanism" or "egalitarianism." It's not "straying from orthodoxy" to suggest that the label matters. It's kind of the point of the thread.
sarah;
nursing is feminism in action. it's what all women all over the earth do, although we are not always given credit for it or paid for doing it. we pick up the pieces of humanity left from wars, sickness, and stupidity and heal it. being given respect and compensation for what ALL women do is what really will promote the role women play in society. i believe nursing plays an essential role in leading the effort.
leelee, there are many male nurses too.
Nursing is of course not feminism in action. It may be - here the term fits - humanism in action. That nowadays only 90% and not 100% of nurses are female is a good thing. From a feminist perspective nursing, like any other profession should not be female or male.
What is feminism? That is too vague.
Here is a feminist, Josephine Baker. If you watch only one thing on youtube this year, this is it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D...h?
v=D8M6vSZMB2U
Jeff, srsly, nobody's perfect, and I've gotten in arguments here when I started talking first and listening second. It's easy to do. But take a step back, and read the thread. Because there's a whole lot of good information on what feminism is, and why it matters that it is feminism, not "humanism" or "egalitarianism." It's not "straying from orthodoxy" to suggest that the label matters. It's kind of the point of the thread.
Jeff Fecke | Homepage | 04.09.08 - 1:44 am | #
Jeff, Thanks.
Jeff,
I was about to try to write something like Jeff Fecke wrote (not nearly as well as he did). Glad you took his comments well.
Dewd, fuck you. I learn a lot around here by listening to people who understand things I can't because I haven't experienced them.
I think it is also important to point out that women have been deemed sub-human, or less than, for so long, that when someone calls themselves a humanist... doesn't mean women are included. The specific designation of FEM helps clear up any doubts.
That men are offended sucks eggs. I would wonder why they are offended, though, if they were actually concerned about what women go through daily. As a human and all.
One thing Jeff-Who-Is-Not-Fecke should learn right off the bat is that feminist forums are constantly bombarded by whiny, entitled, privilege, weak and cowardly people who, while co-opting the language of progressives, are naught but bigots.
Like Pitor and Dewd, for example. We get A LOT of that trash. So, consider that when considering the actions of all of us on these threads. We're used to dipshits like those coming over to spout of bunch of bleedin' bigot nonsense, just to put the attention on themselves and just to troll.
So, it can be difficult, sometimes, to discern the difference between our dipshit trolls and people just less well-versed in these ideas, but not trolls.
IMO, I'm the worst offender in this respect because, well, I'm just not very nice.
but, if you're actually interested in learning, there's an unlimited wealth of knowledge lobbed round here daily.
"Sex positive" - you would've made your point better had you not segued into the standard MRA talking points.
But to answer the first question from my perspective - I think all those types of feminists can be progressives. They all have the same goal in mind; they just disagree about how to get there, or differ in their focus.
The one exception I'd make there would be "pro-life feminists," because in my experience they *don't* want to treat women as full human beings, and if you scratch the surface of the philosophy you find that there's not much actual feminism there. (On the other hand, pro-choice and feminism aren't the same thing; if you take the typical fauxgressive you find that beyond being nominally pro-choice, there's not much feminism there either.)
IMO, I'm the worst offender in this respect because, well, I'm just not very nice.
"...given the level of literacy here .... often daunting ....."words matter.."
Choice ...what is not to understand ...
Quarkist ...!!
I am so impressed that someone finally had the nerve to draw the line in the sand. Melissa, this is a brave and groundbreaking post.
WORD.
the reason i don't call myself a feminist? it'd drag me into the neverending terminological catfight playing out up above. the label isn't worth the infighting, so y'all can keep it.
Anyone who would use the term catfight in regard to a discussion about feminism is pretty obviously not one, so you don't have to worry about it applying to you, nomen nescio.
"Catfight"...yes, how charming.
yep, knew i'd get flamed for that word. substitute "shitfest" if it makes you feel any better, and my point'd still stand --- with the additional data point of being flamed for the choice of one ultimately pointless invective demonstrate it.
That you're not smart enough to understand why the word "catfight" is a stupid word choice on a feminist blog is really not our problem.
We'd like to keep the amount of Teh Stupid(tm) out of our ranks so thank you for not being a feminist.
Hurrah for this short post and fine thread.
danny, sorry. really bad day.
mr. "catfight" -- who was having the "catfight"? none of the self-identified feminists, just a few self-absorbed "nice guys" who are afraid of the f-word.
You know, it pisses me off to no end when ostensibly progressive guys say, with a straight face, that we can't elect a woman right now because "they" (meaning, of course, the Moslem Mohemmedians from islamostan) don't respect women and thus, wouldn't negotiate or do anything else with us if we elected a Female. As if she wouldn't be the president of the USFA for crying out loud.
Heck, I am opposed to Hillary winning the nomination - Because she was wrong about the war and refuses to apologize for being so wrong or at least acknowledge the mistake, because she surrounds herself with people who hates progressive ideals, because I don't like dynatisc politics, etc - but none of my reasons have anything to do with her X chromosome.
FRankly, whenever people suggest that somehow, we're supposed to pick our nominee based upon what bigots in other countries think, it makes me almost want her to win just to make people who think that cry.
Imagine what would happen if someone suggested that we can't elected Obama because people in some country are racist against black people? I am fairly certain that particular POV owuld be rightly shouted down. (And no, I am NOT creating a hierarchy of prejudice.)
Anyway, long story short, yes to this post. You really can't call yourself a progressive if you aren't feminist.
Fuck you and your white power feminism
Lloyd Webber | 04.09.08 - 5:18 pm | #
Classy. Sieg heil!
Or was that your old Kentucky home you were pining for?
Bad days happen sophiefair and they can be ugly. I hope you next day is much much better.
My name is charlotte and I approve this message.
And I'm linking to it.
XOXOX - Jeff
Jeff | 04.08.08 - 5:33 pm
If you were a feminist or a humanist or even a decent human being you wouldn't have done that stupid shit right there. You are obviously an asshat, Jeff.
I'm so glad we got that resolved.
Danny | 04.09.08 - 5:42 pm | #
thanks. it already did.
now if only the trolls would give liss a rest for at least a few days ...
Man, you ladies in this thread are totally bad-ass. I've read this whole thread, and although it just feels a bit wierd to say it, heck yeah - I'm a feminist too. I also must admit to having some old-fashioned chivalry in me. I know it's probably somehow wrong (paternalistic maybe?) but I feel the need to help out ladies in trouble and all that.
But what's just completely awesome about this thread is that I'm just sitting on the sidelines with my hands in my pockets. The ladies here just open can after can of analytical whoop-ass on all this "humanism is better than feminism" dribble. Good god, and much much better than the likes of my poor dumb self could ever do.
To tell the truth, coming to Shakesville is (for a man like myself) like visiting a group of ladies whose company I enjoy. I can't help but feel protective of/for them (I know - that's probably bad male paternalism - sorry!). But then I'm dumbounded and feel a bit useless as the ladies bust out the analytical Kung Fu and kick ass on all the bad guys who suddenly burst into the room.
I'm just blown away how smart all you ladies are and, to tell the truth, a little bashful at the fact that you ladies don't need the likes of me or any other man to "protect your honor" and all that.
I guess what might be hard for Jeff (not Fecke) to come to grips with is that as women become more and more equal, that good old fashioned sense of brave knight chivalry becomes more and more antiquated. And those, like myself, who are wed to this antiquated notion become more and more useless.
But I'm happy to wither away into antiquated uselessness in order to have all women become as bold, brilliant, and courageous as the ladies in this thread.
I don't know if I'd call myself a feminist. I definitely believe in women being treated with respect, they have rights to their own mind and body and I believe there should be equality and respect among the sexes, the races, everyone. I used to call myself a feminist, but I am not sure I can do it anymore. It's hard to let go of it because it's been a part of my identity, but all things change.
There are feminists I greatly admire and they do a lot of good work and I support them in what they do. But some others have opened my eyes to aspects don't quite sit well with me.
So, I support gender equality and all, but I don't think I'm a feminist.
But Genine, if you do that you're letting someone else redefine a perfectly good word, which is one thing the post is about at heart. A huge, huge, HUGE problem with feminism right now is that it's been defined by extremist margins that exist, but aren't what it's really about. It's kind of like how the fundies have taken over the name of Christianity. The answer isn't to give up the name, it's to fight back for what it's supposed to mean. (Or, if your personality isn't a fighter, to support those who do.)
"......fight back for what it is supposed to mean."
As in Liberal !!
Words Matter ...!!
I know what you mean, Car. Normally, I'd totally agree, but, I don't know. It's hard. I have some serious disillusionment issues. But I DO support feminists that are for equality, respect, autonomy, etc and I will continue to do so. But the last few months has been shown me things in a new light and the feminist label doesn't fit with me anymore. Maybe egalitarian fits better with me, if any label at all. I don't like labels much anyway. But I understand sometimes its necessary for conversation.
The other thing about eschewing a label is that as soon as you voice your opinions, others will apply it to you whether or not you like it. Might as well identify
Oh, and Ross Lincoln? I agree that white fauxgressives often tend to be exceptionally sensitive to overt racism/race-based bigotry, but perhaps we should work out a better way to point out dismissals of sexism so as not to imply the existence of a hierarchy of prejudice. Perhaps in this situation, we might suggest that nobody would ever say that because many people outside the US hate US Americans, we shouldn't elect a US American to be our president.
doh.
I meant, might as well identify with a movement if you a.)agree with it, and b.)will be identified as a member of it unless you suppress your opinions.
I really don't understand some of my friends who think being a feminist is bad because... because what? LadyS's reasons for preferring a different term make sense to me, but the few people I've talked to about why they don't like the term feminism can't even think up an unreasonable explanation. They just get uncomfortable and change the subject. It's so aggravating.
I just wanted to say again how much I love this blog! My favorite.
Hell yes. Right on!
It's so sad how few people actually agree with the principles of gender equality these days. I recently surveyed one of my college classes for a project - 6 out of 13 males thought that men and women should have equal rights (and 21 out of 26 females) ... and let me tell you - my school is thought to be very progressive. The numbers for those who actually self-identified as "feminists" were a LOT lower, of course.
I know what you mean, Genine. It can get really tiring having the same conversation of "Yes, I'm an X, but I'm not one of those Xs that you're automatically thinking of...", and on an individual level I wouldn't fault anyone for wanting to not have to battle through it every time. But the louder and more frequently those who can shoulder up do and say "No, that isn't what we are, this is" do so, the less it will be a problem. I have trouble doing it myself because I'm abysmally conflict-averse, but I'll have the back of those who can.
Fuck yeah.
Also, this:
When I advocate for women, I advocate for all women: ...
Is printed and hanging on my fridge.
Shakesville is my first stop every day, and I'm so damn grateful for it and you, Melissa.
Car, it's not that I am conflict-averse. I used to be, but I have gotten over it. I certainly don't argue for the sake of arguing, but I fight the battles that are worth fighting.
But as for the label of feminism... it's not that I am scared of the label or having to defend against it. It's just... disillusionment. It's hard to see a number of feminists I admired engage in behavior they claim to be against. I was really quite emotional about it because I really didn't realize how much I did admire them until certain things happened.
Anyway, I used to have these rousing debates with an older woman who used to call herself a feminist and did a lot of work for the cause in the 60's, 70's and 80's. She no longer considers herself a feminist though because, according to her, feminism has certain underlying assumptions which keep certain factors at play. I disagreed with her and we discussed it extensively. The last time we talked about it was 9 months ago. And now, in the last month or so, I find myself wondering if what she says is true- at least from my perspective. I certainly don't speak for everyone because we all have different perspectives.
Now that I wrote all of that, I guess that's just it. I believe in sexual equality, respect, dignity, autonomy and all those things feminists believe in. But I guess I just have a different perspective than a lot of feminists that I come across. There are still feminists that I admire and fully support however I can. But I don't think I want to have the label of feminism. It's not about what other people think. It's about what I think.
"Please, let's all step back, take a deep breath, and I ask everyone to put an end to the ad hominim attacks."
Funny how it often tends to be guys asking for the everyone to play nice on feminist blogs like this. Why, one would almost think that such fair-minded dudes were sexist without realizing it or something.
So, some of the commentary seems to be making the following point (sorry if I misunderstood):
"Yes, there are bad, evil feminists. But you don't have to accept that. Take back the word and be a good feminist."
Ummm ... who exactly are the bad feminists that we're supposed to be taking the word back from? I've never actually met any "bad" feminists who want to do bad things to men (e.g. send them all to "Monster Island", see above).
Genine, I'm now curious.
What exactly is it that you find undesirable about being wearing the label of "feminist"?
I'm asking because I don't honestly get it. You've said that you believe in the basic tenets of feminism, that you feel yourself to be in agreement with feminists, and that you consider yourself an advocate for what, to both feminists and non-feminists, look like feminist goals.
So... it sounds to me like you are a feminist, but just don't want to label yourself one.
I'm honestly confused, and would appreciate - if you're willing - a bit more explanation of the thoughts behind your choice.
Hi Rana,
I will do my best to explain, though it may not be very good. This is all still new to me so I am still chewing over some fine points, but this is the idea that I have come to:
I no longer (I think) consider myself a feminist because I do not have the same perspective that a lot of feminists that I come across seem to have. For many years, most of my life really, I was not aware of huge difference in these perspectives until the last few months. But the more I think about it, the more it seems that these varied perspectives may not be reconcilable under one label. This realization has lead me to begin to begin to let go of other labels as well for the same reason. For instance, I am heavily involved in LGBT rights and do anything and everything I can for that and to speak (very passionately) for that cause. But I am not an LGBT advocate.
Now people can label me whatever they wish. I have acquaintances that consider me a feminist and an advocate and a host of other things and that is fine with me. I have no problem being associated with the label because it is not a bad label, but it is not who I am and it is not my perspective.
For instance I have a friend who believes in Jesus, goes to church and thinks the bible has a lot of good points, but she is not a christian. The reason she is not christian because no matter how expansive, liberal, tolerant and open-minded a christian can be, there is a certain perspective that necessarily goes along with being christian and she does not hold to that. (I am not saying what that perspective is, so please do not assume I mean anything negative). Some others assume she is christian and she doesn't care. To be christian is not a bad thing, but she knows she is not one because of the difference in mind-set.
Same thing with me. I hope I didn't repeat myself too much and I cleared things up for you.
Fabulous!! You put my feelings so perfectly into words. I'm forwarding this to everyone I know. Thank you.
So who's defining "feminist," Melissa?
You?
Like any other movement, there's enough variation that you might not very well be in alignment with every advocate.
Who's to say what makes anyone more or less acceptable under that banner, to say nothing of the broader banner of progressivism?
I've always been a big promoter of the various Shakes incarnations, but, "important announcement:"
Piss off.
Piss off.
No.
You fucking piss off.
There are plenty other holes on the internet if you fear a real progressivism, a progressivism that makes you challenge yourself, a progressivism that actually will make changes in society.
Because if you have any problem with this announcement, you're not a progressive, and you shouldn't be here.
If you're not a feminist, you're not a progressive, fucking deal with it.
"So who's defining "feminist," Melissa?
You?"
Wow. Imagine that. A woman defining FEMINISM.
Moron.
Feel free to not come back, fauxgressive.
Yes, unfortunately to be labeled a 'progressive' these days you also have to be a female chauvinist, since that's essentially what feminism has become. It's perfectly possible to be a humanist and a progressive, although, I would argue that 'being progressive' is just another buzz word that really means finding a way to justify your arbitrary morality (aka moral relativism).
"these days you also have to be a female chauvinist, since that's essentially what feminism has become"
Translation: Women aren't nice to me! Therefore they are EXACTLY the same as sexists. Really.
" It's perfectly possible to be a humanist and a progressive,"
Strawman. When you can't make your point without logical fallacies, you should probably stop talking.
There's no strawwoman there. Feminism is NOT humanism. Feminism is concerned with women and does not agitate for men, or families that include men. Sorry to ruin your religion.
oh yay! a new troll.
i'm a feminist. you are not. how about you not tell me what it i do, or who it is i "agitate for".
my husband will be really shocked to hear that i just don't care about him. must be true, too, because some random troll told me so.
What about teh mennnnnnnnnnz!?
Maybe if teh menz didn't make it so hard to "agitate" on behalf of women, we could spare a moment for the men. After making breakfast, taking the kids to school, trying to advance a career while also being the one who has to schedule doctor's appointments, arranging for the kids when they can't go to school, keeping track of the groceries, doing the laundry, picking up the kids, making dinner, doing hours more housework a week, spending extra time and money to try to fit in with expected beauty rituals, meeting with the kids' teachers, meeting with the PTO, doing the ironing, shopping for kids' clothes, shopping for school supplies..........................
It's perfectly possible to be a humanist and a progressive
you mean it's perfectly possible to model your intellectual philosophy after the ancient greeks and romans and still be a progressive?
was erasmus a progressive? how about leonardo da vinci? sir thomas more? those are some real humanists.
get a book. learn what humanism means. then fuck off.
Being unable to identify strawmen when you use them should also mean "stop talking".
"Feminism is NOT humanism."
incorrect.
"Feminism is concerned with women and does not agitate for men, or families that include men."
Completely incorrect.
"Sorry to ruin your religion."
I'm an atheist and you're an idiot.
Look, you are free to define your orthodoxy however you want. Most feminists when confronted with the damage done by their sisters will define this as, "I'm not THAT kind of feminist". Really, feminism has no 'definition' because each and every feminist will claim that it means something different. It's nebulous. If you go by the dictionary it means Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
fem·i·nism Audio Help /ˈfɛməˌnɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fem-uh-niz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women.
3. feminine character.
As you can see those rights are advocated FOR WOMEN. Not humanity.
Whereas humanism in this context is:
7. of or pertaining to human affairs, nature, welfare, or values.
As you can see, there is a larger context here that happens to include the interest in the equality of men as well.
Those two definitions mean different things. Letting go of the dogmatic adherence to your religion so that you can view thing ontologically might be beneficial.
In summation, feminism as defined by its actions might be closer to this: a bio-political supremacy agenda that utilizes dogmatic identity politics to promulgate lies and deceit.
As you can see those rights are advocated FOR WOMEN. Not humanity.
The rights are being advocated FOR WOMEN are EQUALITY. They are advocating for equality with men, not a position of supremacy above them. The rights that men have already set the bar; feminists are seeking to give women the rights that they currently lack.
As for humanism: go read some Erasmus.
"As you can see those rights are advocated FOR WOMEN. Not humanity. "
Ah, so women aren't human. Good to see you don't try to hide being a bigot.
Im summation, plantive whines of "embrace humanism" as defined by the actions of the whiners might be closer to this: whiny misogynists who know fuck all about feminism, yet aren't smart enough to not open their mouths and insert their ignorant bigot feet.
Feminism does not endeavor for superiority. Males are not outside feminism, unless, like you, their too stupid to learn about it before deciding against it based on the fact that the name doesn't put them first.
A brief tour around this site would have shown that too you, but, hey, why let reality and truth get in the way of some pathetically bad trolling, eh?
If your not for men's rights then your not progressive! End of story. Open Wide...Shut Up!
Perhaps I am able to define feminism so well because I actually DO know a thing or two about sexist chauvinism. And baby, your religion IS sexism.
Also, one addition:
You are not a progressive if you don't frequently use the word "fucking," in order to accentuate your already limited vocabulary.
Call me crazy, but I didn't think that when Melissa used a word in the QED dictionary, she was making up the word.
Feminism is a part of progressivism. If you cannot grasp that concept, you are obviously not paying attention.
I grasped the concept perfectly with my first post. I'll repeat it here for those of you who are slow learners. Today, female chauvanism is considered being progressive.
Today Jessy broadbrushes and calls it insightful.....
Yawn...............
There have been enough negative comments that I feel compelled to say that I agree with you and I agree with this post. As a feminist, as a progressive, and as a teenager who's already seen and dealt with too much sexism and antifeminism in 19 years of life - including from people that claimed to be liberal - I support you in every way possible and agree completely with this post.
You cannot be progressive and not support equality for everyone, including women. And you can't support equality for women without being a feminist, because that is what feminism is. End of discussion.
I love it when feminists proclaim 'end of discussion'. I laugh, because feminism can not survive an open debate. They must always walk away and declare themsleves victors.
Also, I always especially love it, when someone has seen too much of one response and then very logically (of course) decides that the opposite response is the one they want to side with, because well, they feeeuuul that it's the right thing to do.
So, you can't support equality for women without being a feminist? I believe I have already empirically demonstrated that according to the definition of the terms (yes, words mean things) humanism not only encompasses this, but also provides a much better framework for discussion.
If however, your aim is "more for women", then feminism is your crutch to bear.
At some point though, you will grow up (mentally this can take a while in some severe cases); and then you will laugh about how you deluded yourself into thinking feminism was about equality.
Jessy, if you've come here to convince people that feminism is a) unnecessary, or b) not an fundamental aspect of progressivism, you're in the wrong place.
If you came here to trash feminism, again, you're in the wrong place.
If you came here just to taunt feminists, to tell women (and feminists) that they are stupid, then you are simply providing a perfect demonstration as to why feminism is still very much important and needed in our society.
If brainwashing people into thinking they are perpetual victims of an elusive thing you can't even quantify let alone define adequately is what is needed, then yes, I guess feminism is BADLY needed.
> "So, you can't support equality for women without being a feminist? I believe I have already empirically demonstrated that according to the definition of the terms (yes, words mean things) humanism not only encompasses this, but also provides a much better framework for discussion."
You mean a framework that suits you? Look back at your definition as regards rights:
> "1. the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women."
Feminism concentrates on advocating for rights for women rather than men because THESE ARE RIGHTS THAT MEN ALREADY HAVE, WHICH ARE DENIED TO WOMEN.
So, in fact, no, you can't advocate equality without being a feminist. You can't address an injustice without concentrating on the parties it has been perpetrated against.
Wow. Can you please name one right that men have that women don't have in the US or NA?
"Well, they're not trolling, fucktard MRAs, so they've got that going for them." -- J. Fecke
You simply cannot tolerate having your dogma challenged, can you? Meh...
Just a humble opinion here.... If feminism became about fighting for the much ignored issues of men, then I agree. There is NOTHING more progressive than men trying to get in touch with their sensitive sides, say how they feel, and stand up for themselves as men. Feminism has been mainstream for 40 years so I don't think it's the backbone of progress. gay and lesbian issues are progressive. Dealing with current the women's issues of polygamy and the rest world is progressive. fathers wanting to be there for their kids and take a more serious nurturing role is progressive. feminism needs to do some progression on it's own and have more of an open mind to the other sex on this earth.
A couple thoughts:
1. Why are we feeding the trolls?
2. I get why feminism can be a problematic word for some people, because there have been bad things done in the name of feminism. People who had dealt with enough shit already (lesbians, women of color, even occasionally some of teh menz) have been thrown under the bus, usually because it was politically expedient. It is unfair for feminists not to recognize and own that history, and it is reasonable for someone to be reluctant to identify with a movement that has historically been reluctant to identify with them.
On the other hand, identifying as a feminist carries so much political power - enough that the right has had to turn feminism into a dirty word - that there must be a better way to reconcile its history without rejecting the label entirely. "I am a feminist who believes in equality for everyone, regardless of [pick your identity]" borders on redundant, but maybe it's what some reluctant feminists need to reassure themselves they aren't buying in to a label that has had, at points, an ugly underbelly. That seems far better to me, though, than rejecting feminism outright.
3. About "humanists." Jeff, I'd like to know your take on the doctor analogy from way upthread. In the same way that saying "I'm a cardiologist" doesn't mean "I'm not a doctor," saying "I'm a feminist" doesn't mean "I'm not a humanist." Indeed, it makes as little sense to say "I'm a cardiologist, but not a doctor" as it does to say "I'm a feminist, but not a humanist."
I get the sense there are a lot of closeted feminists out there for whom the label is socially dangerous enough that it's worth walking the walk without talking the talk. The problem with that approach is that, to some extent, the talk is the walk for a movement that has been so focused on intangibles like sisterhood and empowerment. In my mind, identifying as a feminist is one of the most important things a believer in gender equality does. Community is powerful.
4. Fanny, I agree with you 100% that men's issues are ignored and that getting in touch with those issues is progressive. I have found no community more closely allied with that project than the feminist community. None. With few exceptions, the feminist community has volunteered time and energy to a project that is entirely non-female-focused - isn't that special? I think that, far from being outdated, feminism is a beautiful, organic, and giving collective of differently-minded people, and I'm proud and privileged to be a part of it.
> "Wow. Can you please name one right that men have that women don't have in the US or NA?"
When men get raped, they don't have to prove they didn't deserve it. Women shouldn't either.
Men have the right to determine how and by whom/what their bodies can be used. For women, that right is constantly disputed and limited in public politics.
Women with the same jobs as men get paid less.
"Perhaps I am able to define feminism so well because I actually DO know a thing or two about sexist chauvinism."
Stop! My sides! They ache!
" And baby, your religion IS sexism."
Toddler, I'm an atheist and you're an idiot.
"First - When men get raped, they don't have to prove they didn't deserve it. Women shouldn't either."
That is not a 'right' that women lack that men have. That is something you made up and won't be found in any law book.
"Men have the right to determine how and by whom/what their bodies can be used. For women, that right is constantly disputed and limited in public politics."
Oh, you must be referring to thing like selective service and prison rape? No? Once again this is not a formal right women lack.
"Women with the same jobs as men get paid less."
Actually, this is a common lie of feminism. Women with the same experience, skills and credentials make about 97% of what men do. Recently it was reported that women in major metropolitan areas make MORE than men do in the same occupation. Women also comprise more mid-level managers in the US now then men. I suggest you learn some facts before you spout off ignorantly like this. You have failed to show even one legally held right that men have that women do not, despite your vociferous exclamations to the contrary that feminism is "fighting for rights that men already have that women do not have".
Geez. Get an education. It's obvious listening to these feminists is making you dumb.
"On the other hand, identifying as a feminist carries so much political power - enough that the right has had to turn feminism into a dirty word - that there must be a better way to reconcile its history without rejecting the label entirely. "I am a feminist who believes in equality for everyone, regardless of [pick your identity]" borders on redundant, but maybe it's what some reluctant feminists need to reassure themselves they aren't buying in to a label that has had, at points, an ugly underbelly. That seems far better to me, though, than rejecting feminism outright."
You're funny Wil. You believe you can 'save' feminism's image and restore the 'good' to feminism while rejecting the bad.
What I'd ask is why bother? The movement is sexist and hateful towards men and fathers and gender bigoted in its very definition. Oh wait, I know...it's because you want all of that sweet political power you were talking about earlier. I can understand that. At the end of the day you are still clinging on to a sexist ideology that doesn't view you as an equal. See, this can be empirically demonstrated too! Ask yourself what happens in feminism when a man and a woman's viewpoint collide on any issue. Here's a hint for you Wil. The women's viewpoint is the only one that ever matters.
Not listening to them is displaying YOUR rampant ignorance, Jessy.
How pathetic that you censor posts that you don't like. Now that is progressivism.
"Women with the same experience, skills and credentials make about 97% of what men do."
Yeah, like SunlessNick said: Women make less -- even with your own craptastic statistics (which you don't bother to source).
Way to argue feminism's point, Jessy. Like I said -- you're doing great service here, showing the world why feminism is still so important.
I don't recall feminism actually having a point, other than 'more for women'.
SunlessNick claimed women lack rights that men have. I just need one example. Seem you people can't even provide that, since, after all, you don't actually have any legitimate claim to victimhood.
Your entire religion rests on convincing people they are victims of an elusive thing you can't even quantify.
"First - When men get raped, they don't have to prove they didn't deserve it. Women shouldn't either."
That is not a 'right' that women lack that men have. That is something you made up and won't be found in any law book.
But you'll find it in judges' arguments, juries' decisions, newspaper opinion columns and letters, rape jokes, proposed laws, and so on.
It may not be a legal right, but it's a social one.
"Men have the right to determine how and by whom/what their bodies can be used. For women, that right is constantly disputed and limited in public politics."
Oh, you must be referring to thing like selective service and prison rape? No? Once again this is not a formal right women lack.
Among other things, I was referring to abortion, which is a fundamental right of women, and is constantly disputed in the public sphere.
You have failed to show even one legally held right that men have that women do not
But I've shown a difference in socially held rights, something your own arguments are set up to obfuscate.
The movement is sexist and hateful towards men and fathers and gender bigoted in its very definition.
You mean we aren't nice to you when you come in here and spit at us, therefore we must hate men, even when we are men?
Ask yourself what happens in feminism when a man and a woman's viewpoint collide on any issue. Here's a hint for you Wil. The women's viewpoint is the only one that ever matters.
Empiracally false. What you will find is the lack of an assumption that the man's view is all that matters - an assumption you are so used to that you perceive its lack as its opposite.
a) Men do not have the right to determine how and by whom/what their bodies can be used. This is a legal fact, vis a vis selective service and the draft, and it is also an area where women have rights that men do not have. Legally.
b) It's really hilarious when you have to use something as silly as a 'joke' or newspaper column as evidence of pervasive discrimination against you. Really, do you think you are convincing anyone with that? Stick to the topic at hand, legal rights that women allegedly don't have that men do.
c) If you are now changing your argument to be "oh I meant _social rights_ (whatever those are) and not legal rights" then you really have no case at all and should just admit you lied when you claimed men have all these goodies that women don't have.
I don't recall feminism actually having a point, other than 'more for women'.
Idiocy and ignorance, contrary to what your MRA buddies have told you, are no substitute for an argument.
vis a vis selective service and the draft
It is not the fault of feminism that the selective service is in place. Feminists are hardly the ones pushing for a draft, for more war, and for gender inequality in selective service. Again, ignorance is not your friend.
But keep up the good work, Jessy. PD, what was that award you had? The unintentional ally award? Jessy deserves two of them, one for him and one for his massive idiocy. They're like two separate entities.
I don't recall feminism actually having a point, other than 'more for women'.
well, the fact that you apparently fail at reading comprehension and/or fact retention says nothing about feminism. it says one hell of a lot about your lack of basic intellectual skills, however.
Stick to the topic at hand, legal rights that women allegedly don't have that men do.
iirc it was you who brought up legal rights. those of us who are not total morons can conceive that there is more to a free and equal society than laws.
all you have done so far, in bringing up the draft and selective service, is point to ways that the patriarchy also hurts men. now what social movement was it that seeks to dismantle the patriarchy again?
"Idiocy and ignorance, contrary to what your MRA buddies have told you, are no substitute for an argument."
Awesome.
And PD's point has been made flesh by the idiotic likes of "jessy". Clearly, when we are still in the company of gigantic douches such as "jessy", Feminism's relevance and importance are amplified.
If you are now changing your argument to be "oh I meant _social rights_ (whatever those are) and not legal rights"
I'm not changing my argument; you decided legal rights were the only "topic at hand" and I didn't obey. Deal with it.
This is a legal fact, vis a vis selective service and the draft, and it is also an area where women have rights that men do not have. Legally.
Feminists, by and large, advocate against the draft for women or men. And in the meantime, many choose to serve in the military (and due to the nebulous nature of Iraq's front lines see combat despite any nominal prohibitions; and the army itself recognises them when they do, despite the media narrative only inluding Jessica Lynches and Lyndie Englands).
So you'll have to do better than that.
And until you do, you have no right to demand that your voice be considered that of reason.
It always shows the intellectual superiority of your arguments when you use harsh invective and personal attacks against your opponent. That must be another part of being progressive I guess.
In any case, feminism isn't concerned about equality of opportunity. Feminists, like most Marxists, want equality of outcome. This is why, when I point to the fact that you can not even quantify this alleged 'discrimination' in law, you shift the goal posts so that it's discrimination and inequality when someone doesn't like you.
Do women face problems? Yes. Do men? Yes. Are women oppressed? No. Is feminism sexist? YES.
It always shows the intellectual superiority of your arguments when you logical fallacies, lies, evasion and the incessant need to whine like a toddler instead of engagin the points made to you.
"Are women oppressed?"
Do you understand the concept of privilege? Do you understand that you do not get to decide this question?
Get back me when you pull your head out of your ass.
Actually, I take that last sentence back. I like mocking your stupidity, so, keep it up.
"you have no right to demand that your voice be considered that of reason."
Isn't it kinsa humorous though that a overt bigot can't graps why no actual progressives are buyingh is bullshit?
It's funny watching him try to dictate and control a conversation on a topic he's 100% clueless about - save for, of course, the daily print-outs of acceptable thoughts from the MRA Crybaby Hivemind.
Will: "...In the same way that saying 'I'm a cardiologist' doesn't mean 'I'm not a doctor,' saying 'I'm a feminist' doesn't mean 'I'm not a humanist.' Indeed, it makes as little sense to say 'I'm a cardiologist, but not a doctor' as it does to say 'I'm a feminist, but not a humanist.'"
...and I'm both a men's rights activist AND a women's rights activist. Put the two together and I suppose you get "humanist." Problem is...so many here think the two -- MRA causes and feminist causes -- are directly antonymous, and therefore respond to anyone with a different point of view by calling him/her a "troll" or by shouting "ooh, what about teh menz!" Related to this is the problem that you have conveniently assigned a male name ("patriarchy") to what you do not like and a female name ("feminism") to the values you DO espouse. It seems to me that the people who support equality (i.e. support your feminist goals) but would rather give it a gender-neutral name are nonetheless your friends, in spite of your desire to treat them as enemies.
Feminists, like most Marxists
Say what? The two are not related. Granted, there have been a number of feminists who were also Marxists, but there are a lot who are not, as well.
Feminism is basically an outgrowth of the Enlightenment, applying the principles of all people being equal and deserving equal rights along gender lines. It's got nothing to do with Marx.
Or are you just slinging his name around as a scare word, because it works in conservobot MRA circles?
Betty, if you consider it an example of "privilege" for a man to determine the answer to "questions" about women and feminism, then you cannot turn around and "determine" that MRAs are crybabies. Want respect; show respect.
If you are a MRA because you feel patriarchy negatively impacts men -- you are a feminist. The movement covers these issues, in depth. The MRA movement as a whole, however, is anything but feminist or anti-patriarchy -- it seeks to restore the order of male superiority.
"is...so many here think the two -- MRA causes and feminist causes -- are directly antonymous"
You can thank your viciously misogynstic MRA brethren for that.
But of course you blame women.
How very unshocking.
"if you consider it an example of "privilege" for a man to determine the answer to "questions" about women and feminism, then you cannot turn around and "determine" that MRAs are crybabies."
Spare me your painful attempts at logic. A man, being not a woman, can't - literally can't- make a determination about woman. If I were making a "determination" about what it is to be male, you'd have a point.
But, of course, that's not what I did, is it.
Think. Then post.
"Want respect; show respect."
You labor under the delusion that I want respect from you. To be respected by the likes of you would mean I'm like you. Gross. Don't respect me, please.
mra crybabies deserve no respect, and so, they don't get it.
I just realized that probably wasn't enough of a simplistic explanation for you, so let me further elaborate.
Jessy attempted to erase misogyny by deciding, from the outside, that women aren't oppressed. Based on nothing more than his bigotry.
I mocked his bigotry. Not the same thing, is it.
My guess: Jessy = pathetic wimpy ugly guy for whom feminism should equate to the following:
"Feminists should love and date and have sex with pathetic wimpy ugly guys who are nice to them. I'm nice to ladies, but they still won't have sex with me! So something must be wrong with feminism."
Get a grip dude. Here's what it means to be a feminist man: treat ladies with the same dignity and respect that you treat other dudes.
And here's a newsflash for you Jessy: WOMEN DON'T OWE YOU ANYTHING FOR DOING THIS. I think that's your problem. You should do this, not in order to get ladies into the sack, but simply b/c it's the right thing to do. Treating ladies w/ dignity and respect should be its OWN reward.
The point, amandaw, is that if the system in place is negatively affecting men as well as women, then we shouldn't be calling it a patriarchy. We can all work together for change, but we're getting off on the wrong foot if we're giving the problems of the world a male name, and thereby gift-wrapping them and placing them on the door step of the world's men.
" The point, amandaw, is that if the system in place is negatively affecting men as well as women, then we shouldn't be calling it a patriarchy."
Is this what passes for intelligent critique in crybaby mra circles?
Feminism 101. You need it.
Patriarchy negatively affects both sexes, yes. But, you can't honestly deny that men benefit, that men created it, that men control it. It's called patriarchy because it gives men status above others.
Though whining about it being given a male name - based on the language men controlled - and whining about it being put on their doorstep - when they both created and control it, is the height of hilarious immaturity.
bmmg39, did you miss the part in class where you learned that men have created this system and that power has, by and large, throughout history, been passed down by men to men?
I treat women as equals quite without a religion that brainwashes me into thinking women are perpetual victims of men or some elusive concept. Funny how that works.
These MRA dudes sound pathetic. Look guys, whatever you need to do to cowboy up in life is fine. But whatever it is you're crying about under the sheets at night, you shouldn't take it out on feminist ladies.
Feminist ladies are dealing with crappy stuff in life that affects them in a specific, negative way. What real guy wouldn't be on board w/ the objective of stopping this crap?
If MRA dudes gotta hold hands with other MRA dudes and cry about how hard things are for men, well - that kinda creeps me out; but hey, whatever floats your boat.
I mean - being a guy is easy. You can shave your head or let your hair grow long. You can be a skinny little nerd or work out at the gym and pump up. You can let your room get all messy or be a neat freak. You can run around w/ your shirt off on the b-ball court and not get accused of 'teasing.' It's fucking great - I love being a guy.
So it just really creeps me out when guys start crying about how hard it is to be a guy and then get mad at ladies for not feeling sorry for them and their plight of guy-dom.
Dudes, seriously - cowboy up.
"But of course you blame women."
No...when a man blames feminism for the world's problems, or compares feminism to Nazism and the like, I call him out onto the carpet, too.
"If I were making a 'determination' about what it is to be male, you'd have a point...But, of course, that's not what I did, is it."
You referred to those who care about men's rights as crybabies. You hold that your concerns should be treated seriously, while men's concerns are trivial and the product of crybabies.
"You labor under the delusion that I want respect from you."
I don't care if you do or not, just as you shouldn't care if I respect you (personally) or not. I have respect for many, many feminists -- even though I have none for sexists such as yourself, Betty. I'm merely pointing out that the feminists and the MRAs going all Jets and Sharks all the time impedes understanding and progress. Many feminists (and MRAs) will grasp that point, even while you reach for your thesaurus to find ways to be insulting.
China - that might get you laid for a while, but when you realize you've been sold a bag of goods it won't be pretty.
Dude, jessy - you're a wimpy little punk. Seriously. I've read your posts and I completely know you. You're like an archetypal figure among guys.
You're the guy who hangs w/ other guys but never figures out how to be an alpha-male, or even a beta-male. That's cool - no shame in that. There can only be one top dog.
But you've got brewing anger about it and you're looking for a way to deal with it. You want to be alpha-male top dog, but the guys won't let you. So, you attack this male dude structure stuff, not b/c you're really against it, but because you don't know how the fuck to thrive in it.
Then, you get pissed off cause some hot ladies are attracted to the alpha male top dog dudes. You think: "feminist ladies should like pathetic wimpy guys like me, not the big hunky alpha male top dogs."
And this just eats you up. You're not getting any respect from your guy friends and you're not getting any fawning attention from the ladies. You're pissed at everybody, but especially at the feminists. Why? B/c deep down you respect and admire that muscular alpha-male top dog. But the ladies? Fuck them - they're just lowly women.
Dude - you're so messed up in your head. Seriously, the above pattern I've described is so common among guys. I'm surprised there's not a word for you guys.
Cowboy up. Be your own man. Respect ladies. And don't expect anything from ladies in return. You do those four things and everything will be fine.
Jessy can be called all kinds of names. His arguments are revolting. He's acting like a jackass. But I have a problem with calling men who aren't macho "wimpy" and blaming their problems on lack of attractiveness.
Hey China - do I sound angry to you? If you look through the posts here, and the vitriol espoused towards me personally (including from you), you'll see that the only anger here is from the feminists, who can't believe a man dares to have an opinion that GASP disagrees with them! Lord have mercy!
So what? I could do your little pop stand psychology bullshit on them and proclaim them to be ugly lesbians with a severe resentment towards men, but that doesn't make it true or productive.
And I certainly don't respect anyone simply because of the physical attributes they were born with. My respect is to be earned, by men or women, and that's something you should learn as well for yourself.
Astraea, this is stuff guys know about and talk about among each other. Look, I'm not defending the alpha-male top dog structure I've described, whether the heirarchy is based on knowledge or muscles. I read this site all the time and I agree with the feminist critiques of these male heirarchical structures.
But in my opinion and experience among guys, and in my endeavour to understand the "mysoginist progressive male" that pops up like dandelions of late, this is what's psychologically going on.
These guys say: "Yes, women should be equal to men." For saying this, they think they deserve a cookie from ladies. And from being in all-guy conversations with these guys, free from the prying ears of women, it starts to become clear what a "cookie" means to them.
For these mysoginist-progressive-men, feminism is like a tit-for-tat thing. OK, I'll buy in to feminism, but do I get a kiss for that?
There's deep, stupid guy-shit going on with this stuff. I was just trying to call it out. But this is your blog; I'm just a bystander; and I've spoken too much already.
A few more thoughts.
1. Why are we still feeding the trolls?
2. Related to this is the problem that you have conveniently assigned a male name ("patriarchy") to what you do not like and a female name ("feminism") to the values you DO espouse. It seems to me that the people who support equality (i.e. support your feminist goals) but would rather give it a gender-neutral name are nonetheless your friends, in spite of your desire to treat them as enemies.
What's wrong with a movement that deals with oppression (more often than not gendered male) of women giving a male name to oppression and a female name to itself? Men need to understand that feminism as a cause is not about us. We are welcome at the table (usually), and we sometimes get peripheral benefits from participating, but at its heart, feminism addresses the specific oppression of women by a system that is gendered male. If you deny that that oppression exists, you aren't a humanist. I you believe it exists, you are a feminist. It's that cut and dried.
The essential problem that you and so many other commenters have is that you imagine that feminists believe patriarchy is the only system of oppression worth fighting, or that we imagine patriarchy is the worst oppression out there. No feminist worth his or her salt believes that. In fact, the reason feminists here and elsewhere write satirically about the "oppression olympics" is that making a comparison between systems of oppression is silly and not fruitful. Some feminists give their time and energy to ending patriarchy. We do so because ending patriarchy is important. We also believe ending racism, homophobia, hypermasculinism, et cetera is important. That's just not where we put our time. What makes us feminists isn't where we dedicate our time and energy, it's our belief that patriarchy's specific effect on women is one important problem that needs to be addressed. The existence of other important problems does not negate the importance of feminism, and were we to dedicate ourselves to those problems, we would not be less feminist.
Does that make sense?
3. For these mysoginist-progressive-men, feminism is like a tit-for-tat thing. OK, I'll buy in to feminism, but do I get a kiss for that?
This might be the most concise articulation of what it means to be a Nice Guy® that I've ever seen.
4. But I have a problem with calling men who aren't macho "wimpy" and blaming their problems on lack of attractiveness.
Good call. Can we start ignoring Jessy yet? I think he's more than proven this thread's discussion isn't the discussion he wants to have.
Will - "If you deny that that oppression exists, you aren't a humanist. If you believe it exists, you are a feminist. It's that cut and dried".
So I'm a feminist? Actually, I think I am closer to the dictionary definition of feminist than many feminists. There is a huge disconnect between the definition and the practice though, that much is for sure.
Anyways, now that I'm a feminist I guess I will have to convert as many people as possible to my brand of feminism.
The funny thing with feminists though, is that many of you would deny that a place like www.ifeminists.net represents feminism at all. As I said before, feminism really doesn't mean anything for that very reason. The only thing you can reliably translate it to is "rights for women", which always invariably translates to "more for women".
It's like any entrenched instituationalized entity. The political power of feminism must be capitalized upon, even if the issues change and the relevance doesn't exist.
Unrelated:
I think there are really interesting parallels between dealing with trolls and dealing with abusive people. In both instances, you have to acknowledge that their problems are not your responsibility to fix, and that the only viable starting point for action is to accept your inability to change them and either ignore them or remove them from your life depending on how damaging they are.
There should be a service called TrollAnon.
There should be a service called TrollAnon.
Bottom line, though, is you have to admit you have a problem, first. Jessy is still deep in the poor me, enraged at women stage that makes him literally believe that "rights for women" equaling "more for women" means "ZOMG! women are out for my balls *clutch* *clutch*".
Argh, HALOSCAAAAAN!
One more time.
And, should you still not get it, Jessy, more for women in a society that has denied them rights and put them in the position of second class citizens is actually a good thing, and no one is after your balls. Take heart, and get a brain!
" I treat women as equals quite without a religion that brainwashes me into thinking women are perpetual victims of men or some elusive concept. Funny how that works."
Translation: This is what the Whiny MRA crybaby hive mind told me to say today. Please ignore that it bears no resemblance to reality. I can't handle reality.
___
"No...when a man blames feminism for the world's problems, or compares feminism to Nazism and the like, I call him out onto the carpet, too."
Uh-huh. And anyone who believes that, please join me in my office to the left. I've got an excellcent time share opportunity for you.
"You referred to those who care about men's rights as crybabies. You hold that your concerns should be treated seriously, while men's concerns are trivial and the product of crybabies."
No, I didn't. I labeled MRAs as crybabies because, well, I've yet to meet one that isn't. Those who actually care about mens' rights are not MRAs. MRAs are whiny crybabies who are mad because their mommy-wife won't obey them.
I care about men's rights. I actively participate in activism for rights of men - gay men, trans men, differently-abled men, abused men, imprisioned men, homeless men, addicted men, sick men, fathers, holy men.
Notice, whiny crybabies upset that their mommy-wife left them isn't on the list.
So, fail.
"I don't care if you do or not, just as you shouldn't care if I respect you (personally) or not."
No worries then because, your respect is the second least imporant thing to me on earth. The least important thing being jock itch.
"I have respect for many, many feminists"
translation: "and by "feminists" I mean those who agree with me."
"-- even though I have none for sexists such as yourself, Betty."
So, I'm sexist despite being an activist for men's rights? Oh, no, I get it - I'm a sexist because I'm not an idiot who falls for mra lies. Got it.
"I'm merely pointing out that the feminists and the MRAs going all Jets and Sharks all the time impedes understanding and progress."
Wrong. Mras are their own worst enemies. Feminists have no problem aligning with people who actual desire progress and equality. Mras, otoh, just want to be king of the hill and will threaten violence, torture, rape and death on those who disagree.
"Many feminists (and MRAs) will grasp that point, even while you reach for your thesaurus to find ways to be insulting."
Was that supposed to be witty?
Because, fail. Again.
"and no one is after your balls"
Actually, feminists are after men's balls - here's a somewhat recent example:
"Members of the FAL wore scissors around their necks, as members of the audience lightheartedly sang a song about castration."
"
"Hello, my name is Mary Man-Hating-Is-Fun," one participant said. "I am 23 years old, and I am what a feminist looks like. Ever since I learned to embrace my feminist nature, I found great joy in threatening men's lives, flicking off frat brothers and plotting the patriarchy's death. I hate men because they are men, because I see them for what they are: misogynistic, sexist, oppressive and absurdly pathetic beings who only serve to pollute and contaminate this world with war, abuse, oppression and rape.""
Yep, sounds about right.
http://media.www.tnhonline.com/m...72.shtml?
page=1
Nice try Jessy -- try quoting the article in context, by using the statement which precedes the paragraph beginning: "Hello, my name is Mary . . . blah, blah, blah . . . ".
The sentence directly before this is "Monologues by members of the FAL poked fun at feminist stereotypes and set the tone of an evening of sarcasm and wit." (emph. mine)
Because otherwise, we might think that you're just a hyperbolic idiot who is grasping at straws by quoting things out of context so that he can prove how teh wimmenz iz mean to us!!!
Once again, way to go, Jessy -- you bolster feminism by your very existence.
Did you fail to read this part? "Members of the FAL wore scissors around their necks, as members of the audience lightheartedly sang a song about castration."
Feminists are after your balls. QED.
I have yet to see any MRA's gather to sing songs about sewing women's vaginas shut. It's obvious where the hate is here.
"Feminists are after your balls. QED."
Well damn -- I must not be a feminist then. Cuz I have no. interest. in. your. balls. whatsoever. Thanks for raising my consciousness, Jessy!
Feminists are after your balls. QED.
My blood drenched scissors and testicle trophy belt. Let me show you it.
Sorry, Jessy, but the sad truth is, feminists have no interest in your balls.
Whoa-oh, here she comes!
Watch out boy, she'll chew you up!
Whoa-oh here she comes!
She's a maneater!
Hall & Oates knew the dangers of feminism. They knew, man!
Well if you see no problem with that behaviour, then there is no hope for you or your religion of feminism, and all pretense of 'equality' is lost.
Advocating sexual violence, even in jest, is in very poor taste, but many feminists wouldn't blink twice to do so, as the replies here indicate.
Please, grow up and get a real belief system, that actually, you know, means something.
Jessy, run! They're after your shriveled naughty bits!
"Did you fail to read this part? "Members of the FAL wore scissors around their necks, as members of the audience lightheartedly sang a song about castration."
Yeah, like I said: "poked fun at feminist stereotypes and set the tone of an evening of sarcasm and wit."
You DO understand what sarcasm is, don't you, Jessy? And wit? Oh . . . . wait . . . .
Jessy is very serious. He's clutching his scrotal sack right now!
Trackback: dissecting Glenn Sacks' blatant misrepresentation of this post.
It is quite clear that scissors (on mass) represents a bit more than satire. In fact, in what should be perfectly normal to the apologists, I can see an MRA gathering with sewing needles and thread. All satirical, of course. Yes, once again, feminism has proven just how munificent it is.
Ah, progressivism.
Advocating sexual violence, even in jest, is in very poor taste
Jessy, didn't you tell me that bringing up rape jokes as an example of misogyny was hilarious and unconvincing? Well shouldn't that go for castration jokes too?
Indeed, it is hilarious and unconvincing as evidence of oppresion, but very convincing as evidence of lack of fair play or intellectual honesty withing your ideology.
Wow! Just . . . wow.
Rape jokes are ". . . hilarious and unconvincing as evidence of oppresion"[sic], but scissors worn "on mass" (I think you might have meant "en masse", there, but wev) -- as a very clear sarcasm about feminist stereotypes, by a bunch of feminists, poking fun at themselves, at a feminist event, are a serious threat, and evidence that feminists are "after your balls"?
Jessy. I implore you. Seek help now.
bmmg39: "No...when a man blames feminism for the world's problems, or compares feminism to Nazism and the like, I call him out onto the carpet, too."
BB: "Uh-huh. And anyone who believes that, please join me in my office to the left. I've got an excellcent time share opportunity for you."
Pardon? Betty, you don't know anything about me, and therefore are unqualified to make any such denial. I am, in fact, currently engaged in just such a conversation (condemning a "feminism = Nazism" link) on another message board. I was also INVITED onto a feminist board two years ago by the feminist host, who knew that men's issues are important to me, because she (as I am) was looking for common ground.
"I labeled MRAs as crybabies because, well, I've yet to meet one that isn't. Those who actually care about mens' rights are not MRAs. MRAs are whiny crybabies who are mad because their mommy-wife won't obey them...I care about men's rights. I actively participate in activism for rights of men - gay men, trans men, differently-abled men, abused men, imprisioned men, homeless men, addicted men, sick men, fathers, holy men."
Remember the person who said, "Well, if you believe in women's equality, that means you're a feminist!" Likewise, if you care about men's rights, then you're a men's rights activist. If CERTAIN MRAs say things you don't like, it's okay to say so. CERTAIN feminists say things I find offensive, but I won't paint all feminists with the same broad brush, and neither should you with MRAs.
Jessy is merely pointing out that at least one group of women put on a production, intended to be humorous or satirical, about mutilating people's genitals, which (we like to believe) most people find horrific. If men put on a similar show, making light of rape or FGM, regardless of what their main point was, it would receive global condemnation.
bmmg39 flawlessly shows his inability to understand what satire is. You can't make these people up!
J. Goff, I teach English and am well aware of what satire is. Just answer the question. If men had done a satirical piece about women being raped or sexually mutilated, would you be angry, or would you appreciate the point they're trying to make through the use or satire?
If men had done a satirical piece about women being raped or sexually mutilated, would you be angry, or would you appreciate the point they're trying to make through the use or satire?
First, we live in a rape culture, so using satire to mock the stereotype of a male rapist is both ludicrous and profoundly stupid, because male rapists are something that our society has plenty of. Same with sexual mutilation of women. Castration of men, however, done by wandering hordes of women spurred on by the anti-male bloodlust given to them by feminist teachings, is a myth, one actively cultivated by people like Jessy who see, in feminism, a misandrist bogeyman.
Not only is rape a crime that happens all the time, perpetrated on women by men, it's actively a problem in our culture. Castration? Not so much. More to the point, we don't need a bunch of dudes talking about raping and sexually mutilating women to know that rape is a problem in our culture. The only thing you could possibly use to say that feminists are out for men's balls is that some women at this one place at this one time wore some scissors and mocked the stereotype of castrating feminists.
Are you really this dense? I pity your English students.
Ditto to J.Goff. I'm afraid for your English students if you have such a poor understanding of satire. In fact, statire has often used very disturbing images (eating children ring a bell?).
The feminists in question used such a shocking image for the purpose of ridiculing and exposing the real harm: stereotypes used to discredit feminists.
Oh riiiiight. The REAL harm is the stereotypes they are defending against, not the ones they are perpetuating....
Uh huh.
Interesting. It's always the threads the MRA angry men-boys that go on, and on, and on, and ....
(... with the MRA angry ....)
I'm pretty sure I don't want to know what stereotypes Jessy thinks they're perpetuating.
"Betty, you don't know anything about me, and therefore are unqualified to make any such denial."
Except, you know, EVERY post you've ever made on this blog.
Duh.
Likewise, if you care about men's rights, then you're a men's rights activist."
The difference being, of course, that Feminism is an actual movement, whereas MRAs as just a pack of crybabies with violently misognyistic tendencies. As I already explained, but you, of course, ignored - there's a difference between the two groups that, if ignored, renders your babbling irrelevant. Mras =/= feminists.
"CERTAIN feminists say things I find offensive, but I won't paint all feminists with the same broad brush, and neither should you with MRAs."
You labor under the delusion that anyone cares what you do.
"CERTAIN feminists say things I find offensive, but I won't paint all feminists with the same broad brush"
What, do you mean a broad brush like:
"you also have to be a female chauvinist, since that's essentially what feminism has become." (3 days ago)
OR
"Perhaps I am able to define feminism so well because I actually DO know a thing or two about sexist chauvinism. And baby, your religion IS sexism." (3 days ago)
OR
"I love it when feminists proclaim 'end of discussion'. I laugh, because feminism can not survive an open debate. They must always walk away and declare themsleves victors." (3 days ago)
OR
"The movement is sexist and hateful towards men and fathers and gender bigoted in its very definition." (2 days ago)
OR
"In any case, feminism isn't concerned about equality of opportunity. Feminists, like most Marxists, want equality of outcome." (2 days ago)
OR
"Is feminism sexist? YES." (2 days ago)
OR
"Actually, feminists are after men's balls" (Yesterday)
OR
"Feminists are after your balls." (Yesterday)
Nope. No broad brushes there. *eyeroll*
Seriously, do you even listen to yourself?
But as I've said before -- keep commenting -- you are the perfect poster-child for "Feminism Still Important!"
Umm...Portly, you might want to learn to read a bit better. I said those things, not the poster calling himself bmmg39.
I also stand by them.
"I'm pretty sure I don't want to know what stereotypes Jessy thinks they're perpetuating."
Why those of man hating feminists of course. It's clear to anyone who read the article.
Men's Rights Activist here who cares about women's rights, but will not define himself exclusively with a gender not his own. Rights come with responsibilities.
When men attend university in equal numbers with women and when men live as long as women and when men have men only spaces like women, then men will be equal to women. And when women die or are injured on the job with the same frequency as men, that will be a day of equality. When as many women are homeless as men, that will be a day of equality, and when women are jailed as frequently and for equal terms, that will be a day of equality.
Not wanting to drag women down to where most men are, but trying to bring most men up to where most women are. that is my idea of 'progressive'.
Is There Anything Good About Men?
http://denisdutton.com/baumeister.htm
“How can you say culture exploits men, when men are in charge of everything?”
If one were to look downward as well as upward, to the bottom of society instead, one finds mostly men there too. (not that we should be concerned about men while we CLAIM we are for equal treatment)
Who’s in prison, all over the world, as criminals or political prisoners? The population on Death Row has never approached 51% female. Who’s homeless? Again, mostly men. Whom does society use for bad or dangerous jobs? US Department of Labor statistics report that 93% of the people killed on the job are men. Likewise, who gets killed in battle? Even in today’s American army, which has made much of integrating the sexes and putting women into combat, the risks aren’t equal. This year we passed the milestone of 3,000 deaths in Iraq, and of those, 2,938 were men, 62 were women.
If feminism is about equality of the sexes, then why are feminists so demeaning of men's rights and men's right's activists? We are not all bad people. The men’s right’s movement has its wackjobs as does the feminist movement.
MOST MRA's (men's right's Activists) do not say that men are MORE oppressed than women, they say that they are oppressed just as women are oppressed (but in different ways).
MRA’s concern, however, is that the oppression of men has been ignored not just by society, in general, but by feminists in particular (who claim to be out to end gender stereotypes, but frequently create new gender stereotypes against men). One disgusting negative stereotype about men is DV that led to VAWA (Violence Against Women Act). Feminists seem to praise VAWA rather than criticize it for its gendered focus on women (it ain’t equal). If violence is bad, than ALL violence is bad and deserves attention, not just violence against women. When I meet battered men who are unwelcome at shelters, it makes me sick.
I was raised by lesbian feminists who had no clue what hurdles I had to face in life and ignored the difficulties I faced as a non-woman.
Who's keeping women out of more dangerous (and typically higher paying with less education) jobs?
Men.
Who's committing most violent crime?
Men. Why don't you take your fucking responsibility for that?
Who set policies keeping women from the most dangerous positions in the military?
Men.
Who bears the real brunt of the casualties of war?
Women who are civilians, and children.
When you combine homeless stats for single women and women with children, they are on par with men. Oh, and guess what a leading cause of homelessness is for women: domestic violence.
Now stop flooding the thread with your MRA crap, troll.
"Either you think us queers are equal to straights and hence deserve marriage rights just as much as straight do
More than equal IMO
correct me if I'm wrong, but I've never heard of a gay arranged marriage, or gays getting married in order to uphold their class status (as many English 'nobility' still do)."
yeomanpip
Heterophobia is all the rage. Gays are better than non-gays? Cuz you do not arrange marriages? Few of your marriages last anyway. Marriage is hardly a life long arrangement anymore, but it is a hard thing to find a long lasting relationship among gays (or lesbians) and also note that domestic violence rates among lesbians is the highest of all demographics (not that we want to take away from the mythology that men are the violent ones)….
Jeff Fecke if u cannot see the problems with the matriarchy (and the hurt is causes not only men, but women also, you are either willfully blind (likely) or misandrist (but likely both)….
Long live the matriarchal democrats! Patriarchy is bad, but matriarchy is perfect (and that is not contradiction to our claim of equality)….
Roe v wade for men (cuz you have no right to control our bodies via our incomes for decades for choices we do not have).
Democrats, basically, have one issue and only one issue (abortion).
That is why they lose again and again.
I am a disabled non-woman who can collect no social security cuz the dems did the same as the repubs, spent surplus social security money on the fed budget deficit instead of paying the disabled (who are most frequently non-women), but who cares about non-women?
Hypocrites…..don’t like it when women were/are excluded by words like mankind to refer to men and women, but have no problem dissing a man who wants his movement to be gender inclusive.
Clearly feminism is not a gender inclusive term and only hypocrisy keeps one from recognizing it.
I see the woman of color is allowed to call you out on your shit, but not a non-woman!
To the extent that feminism truly does support equality of the sexes, it will survive, but to the extent that feminism is about special treatment for women (and less than stellar treatment for non-women), that is the extent that it shall be on its way out.
In order for feminism to retain its strength and importance to society, it must be against misandry, just as it is against misogyny, but to the extent that feminists cannot find misandry even when it is right in front of them or was created by them, then it will be despised, ridiculed and condemned as the chauvinism it seeks to rid society of.
“Humanism will replace feminism when patriarchy ceases to exist.”
Humanism will replace feminism when MATRIARCHY ceases to exist.
Cheesus, why don't you get a freaking hobby, instead of talking to your self on an old thread?
matriarchy? please. Get some new limp and pathetic excuses for being an idiot bigot.
Betty, lol!
That wasn't to hateful of me, was it?
But what is a feminist? It all hinges on the definition. Personally, I'm all for equality and therefore, presumably, a feminist in theory. In practice, of course, women's rights activism has little to do with advancing equality, and everything with male-bashing and man-hating as well as advocating plain discrimination against men. So my being a feminist in theory does not imply that I agree with the majority of those who call themselves feminists.
The very word "feminism" in and of itself is in fact so vague, that it is largely devoid of content. So first define your position (or the position that defines feminism) and THEN I can tell you if I agree with you. (Amazing how people use meaningless words and think they are actually saying something!)
Oh, and by the way, note the very flawed line of reasoning exhibited by
Astraea above:
"Who set policies keeping women from the most dangerous positions in the military?
Men."
Ah! But from the fact that OTHER men are (presumably) responsible for men dying, or dying in greater numbers than women, it does, of course, NOT follow that the dying men (or rather the men in danger of dying) should not be helped and supported. The fallacy here is, essentially, that all men are essentially reduced to one single group of people: the 'guilty' ones, the perpetrators.
To put my point differently, if most perpetrators are male, if does not exclude the possibility that most VICTIMS are ALSO male!
This pattern is in fact showing all the time. Military conscription is an excellent case in point. Yes, historically speaking, cuntries were usually led into war by men. But then again, OTHER men - the conscripts - did the dirty work! And even today, normally only men are conscripted (which hopefully everybody agrees runs counter to the principe of equality).
And another pearl from another poster above:
"It is not the fault of feminism that the [men-only] selective service is in place."
Yes it is. True advocates of equality will fight against all gender discrimination, regardless of which gender is disadvantaged (and in the case of conscription, it is of course a very heavy disadvantage). THAT is the problem with most people who all themselves feminists: their SELECTIVE perception and their SELECTIVE normative commitment.
Let's work together and fight ALL gender discrimination.
hmm, sock puppet? Or did Akhi have to get one of his friends to come fight the evil feminists?
"In order for feminism to retain its strength and importance to society, it must be against misandry, just as it is against misogyny, but to the extent that feminists cannot find misandry even when it is right in front of them or was created by them, then it will be despised, ridiculed and condemned as the chauvinism it seeks to rid society of."
Well said Akhi!
Astraea,
Look up and you see a FEW men at the top of the heap (so get angry), but take the time to look down, too, and you will find LARGE NUMBERS of men at the bottom of the heap! And do what? Empathize? With those penis lugging magots? They are all trolls and MRA scum
Remember when feminism was young and feminists were mostly dismissed as being angry (as if they had no right to be angry). Well, I remember those days, (I was young then and naive and I believed everything my lesbian feminist mothers taught me). Yup, they taught me that I had to treat everyone equally (seems fair, i could do that). And they taught me I must not take advanatge of my male priveledge (I never found that existed). Men were just as likely to be nice to me cuz i was malke as they were likely to be NOT nice to me cuz i was male (and competed with them for resources like jobs, etc). And women were likely to NOT be nice to me as well (they seemed to see me as competition as well, for promotions, etc).
History sure appears to repeat itself, in fact, cuz nowadays most feminists are quick to dismiss MRA’s as merely being angry males (as if men do not have the right to be angry).
I have a plaque in my workshop that says, "Don't complain, why are you complaining, what do you have to complain about, your complaints are not real, stop complaining!" to remind me that any complainst i might have as a male will be mostly ignored by men and women (the matriarchy teaches us to ignore men's complaints as much as the patriarchy teaches us to ignore men's complaints. I should not take it personally, i should just expect my concnersn and complaints to be ridiculed and inored (I should expect to be insulted and attacked if i dare publicize my difficulties in life).
I used to work on a construction crew (I was an electrician before being injured on the job - not that any empathy should be expended for someone who makes light possible for BOTH genders). On the few occasions of working with women, we treated them well not merely because it was the law, but it seemed the decent thing to do.
DO some men discourage their daughters from entering construction trades and other dangerous work? Yes. Are all men to blame cuz some men do this? Do some bosses NOT hire women for construction jobs cuz they are women? I do not doubt it or condone it. But, should we hate all men cuz some men do bad things. Certainly, many men would happily have women on their workforces so as to appear gender neutral (fair and/or equal). While there are plenty of men who treat women unfairly, your inability to recognize those men who go out of their way to treat women fairly is far greater than you will ever seem to realize and not just cuz it is the law. We were brought up to act fairly (by both of our parents, our mothers AND our fathers) and to treat everyone fairly.
On one of the most memorable occasions of working with a woman on the job, I met a woman on a small job site (apartment renovations) who was still developing her skill set – as was I – we were two employees and one boss, so we became close by necessity. I treated like anyone else, not merely cuz it is the law, but cuz it seemed fair and reasonable – I would want to be treated this way by women (although I rarely was treated as well by fellow women workers in the past – I refused to let that affect how I was gonna live my life).
At firs this woman was standoffish almost to the point of being rude (which seemed strange since she was form northern California and we were working southern California). I gave her her space and at the end of the second day I offered her a gift of some muscle relaxant (which I often give to men I work with and respect as well). It kind of says, we work hard and we need to take care of our bodies at the end of each day so we will be ready to work the next day or be able to recreate (have fun).
She came around (to being friendly) a day or more after the gift was offered. She told me about her ‘partner’ who was still up in norcal and how our boss whom she lived with wasn’t treating her well (she wasn’t sure what to do). I told her what I tell every man who is not happy on the job. I said, “There is no shortage of low pay for hard work”. This might seem complicated, but it is really is not. There is no shortage of jobs that pay not much for the level of risk and hard work involved. There is, however, a shortage of jobs that pay well for the level of risk and hard work involved. Why should she work hundreds of miles from her ‘partner’, when she could just as easily work far closer to home and make about the same wage and be close to her.
Personally, I quit the job not that long after cuz I was not happy with the boss either. I refuse to be abused (and I note that that gut was an equal opportunity abuser, he abused men AND women equally – I had been warned by the other men about how bad he treated people). Interestingly, a fellow employee refused to work with that guy, subsequently – he finally stood up for himself and said no more abuse.
FEEL free to hate all men for the deeds of a few men. Feel free to hate all MRA’s cuz some are want access to their children. Feel free to assume that MRA’s are against women’s rights cuz they are against the extreme elements of the feminist movement (and dare to suggest that men deserve a shere of rights with their responsibilities.
Feminists often get a bad rap cuz they still think that all men are against them, that all men are in positions of power and refuse to accept women’s unique needs, condition, and contributions. Well, do not think that only women have unique needs, conditions, and contributions. Men have them as well.
I REPEAT myself here (not sure why, I must be a troll, since you ignored this most important point before and will likely do it again). I gave only one example and could give man many more cases where men have acted in the interests of women (and not without their input – try not to pretend that there are not many highly organized women’s groups that give input to politicians on WOMEN’s issues).
Men voted for VAWA (and excluded specific mention of violence against men – equal treatment for violence against men took much time for the congress – men AND women – to recognize), but you can continue to pretend that men on the top of society IGNORE violence against women.
Interestingly, while feminists rail on and on about the lack of women at the very tippy top of the pyramid, they love to ignore their MASSIVE power base within the political parties in the party machine and the voting public (women participate in greater numbers in all the lower levels of politics from voting to campaigning). No man would totally ignore women voters as so feminists like to pretend that male politicians do (how else could a vote for the violence against women act EXCLUDE MEN if these men were so unable to represent women – they did it so well, they ignored violence against men almost entirely).
That is one of the things I have always done in my life, stood up for the little guy and the downtrodden woman (equally). I offered to teach self defense classes to women at the women’s center for free (I had formed a self defense club at the university where I attended) and they refused to have my free services cuz I was a man (I won’t be upset at having been turned down but neither should I be treated as if I do not take women’s safety to be of the utmost importance). Many men take women’s safety to be of such paramount importance that they will risk their own lives, health and well being to protect women even if it means they will be ridiculed and abused for it.
The whole notion of rape culture is one of the most offensive misandric notions of feminism has concocted.
Misandry is so well hidden, spell checkers do not even know the word. My spell checker knows the words misogyny, misogynistic and yet it does not seem to know the word misandric. Which form of chauvinism is presently being ignored in society?
If rape were encouraged by law and by deed, you could make that claim with a straight face. Rapists are plastered all over the web in sex offenders registries the country over (but let us pretend that it is not taken seriously).
Rape is illegal in every jurisdiction, in every county, in every state, and at the federal level (but let's pretend it is not taken seriously).
Rape is the only crime for which the death penalty is being considered short of murder (but let's pretend that rape is not taken seriously).
I personally spent a decade of my life practicing martial arts to protect individual women from rape (I was raised on a healthy dose of fear of rape, told it was everywhere and it needed to be stopped) and to be able to pass that knowledge on to women (as a group) for their protection.
Rape culture could refer to rape in popular culture, but that INGORES the FACT that when rapes occur in popular culture, it has become commonplace for all sorts of extra legal retribution to occur. Fantasy killings and beatings of the rapist as well as legal sanctions (jail time, etc). This is hardly a culture that sanctions rape in its popular media (except raping of the male in prison as retribution which feminists have been known to condone with their own brand of humor).
The only place where rape is routinely laughed in popular culture is about is the rape of men in prison.
Once again, GET A GODDAMN HOBBY, BOY!
And stop talking to yourself its goddmand creepy. You're never going to get a girlfriend if you keep being creepy.
Now, turn off the video game, go take a shower, put on some clean clothes and LEAVE YOUR BEDROOM for once.
Damn.
And another of the most disappointing lines of thought of many feminists is the notion of matriarchy as this utopian ideal and patriarchy as the worst thing to have been created ever.
Under patriarchy, nothing is good, nothing positive has ever occurred. Nothing works as it should, there is violence and rape everywhere (and those who espouse these views like to see themselves as optimistic).
Conversely, under matriarchy, they imagine that there would be no bad, nothing negative would ever exist under the magical power of the matriarchy. No wars would ever occur under the power of matriarchy they imagine cuz women all good and never do wrong without the suggestion, threat of force or direction of big bad men.
Under matriarchy, no one ever goes hungry and under patriarchy (it being so vile), no one ever gets fed.
If you want to be simplistic, I simply say:
Patriarchy = bad
Matriarchy = good
If feminist were as egalitarian and fair minded as they pretend to be, they wouldn’t mind seeing some of the good aspects of patriarchy and it wouldn’t too hard for them to see some of the drawbacks of matriarchy.
Personally, I see that both patriarchy and matriarchy have good and bad points. I was raised in a matriarchal household and I dare to see the good and the bad that comes with matriarchy.
Sure, I was raised to see only the bad of patriarchy, but recognize that this cynicism has clouded my vision. While I won’t pretend that patriarchy is the utopian version of social organization that some feminists want to pretend that matriarchy is, I dare to see the good that patriarchy has brought human civilization as well as the bad.
The glass is half full as well as half empty.
Feel free to suggest that patriarchy is all empty (ignoring what good men have done for men AND women and society), but do not delude yourself into expecting the rest of us to value your perceptions as you too readily overlook the good when pointing out the bad.
That is why so many people do not self identify as feminists even when they support the ideals and that is why feminism gets such a bad rap even when so many people support the ideals of feminism.
The practice of feminism and the ideals of feminism have strayed too far. Although espousing a desire for equality of treatment, they too often refuse to visit the male of the species and assess his condition. They are more than willing to look at presidents of countries and president’s of corporations in envy of their power, but they refuse to look at the homeless men, those with and without minimum wage jobs. They refuse to look at men’s shorter longevity as anything but men’s fault (they are overly willing to blame the victim in this case while rising in anger if the same is done to them).
Our country locks more men in jail than any other in the entire course of human civilization as a matter of numbers of percentages. This travesty of justice is more often brought to bear on the male of the species and the one movement that purports to be concerned about gender unfairness acts as if there is only one gender in far too many cases.
That men would rise up and begin to notice the difficulties men face as a group should not be a surprise to feminists who continue to revisit their ideals of eliminating gender stereotypes. And those feminists who follow their ideals of equal treatment of the genders should think twice before ridiculing those who claim that they were mistreated on account of their gender (either by men or women).
Feminists do not like to be ridiculed, ignored, and/or attacked for daring to sepak truth to power and yet they are among the first to ridicule, ignore, and/or attack men who dare to stand up for their rights.
If it is a battle of the sexes you want, that is what you have. If on the other hand, you want to create harmony and understanding, you might want to listen to men’s issues with a less jaundiced eye.
We are not saying you were not mistreated. We are saying we were mistreated, too, and for similar reasons. We could easily be allies, but you see us as demons and attack us unmercifully. We will do what we can not to take it personally, we know you have been hurt, but be strong and recognize who your allies are. Many MRA’s like myself were warriors for feminism for decades. We know you weaknesses as well as your strengths cuz not only were we with you way back when, we are still with you today, still supporting your movement even if we dare to give it another name (one that is inclusive of our gender, not EXCLUIVE).
We know you were excluded for some time, but that doesn’t justify your excluding us now.
Yes, you have impressed us all with your ability to regurgitate MRA crap and to copy and paste. Now GTFO.
Wow, a sublimely concise explanation of the issues Akhi. It really is too bad that these feminists are too blinded by their bigotry and hate to be receptive to it.
And so it goes.
Jessy & Akhi = two pathetic dudes who (1) get no respect from other guys in real life & (2) can't get any ladies in real life to make out w/ them. This makes Jessy & Akhi very angry towards women, particularly feminists.
From a dude to a dude, you guys seriously need to learn how to cowboy up in life. This is embarrasing to watch. Seriously, life gets a lot better when you focus on making your own way in life, rather than begrudging others what they get in life for themselves (e.g. ladies who acquire equal rights but still don't want to kiss you).
Jessy, Akhi, has it occurred to you to take it personally? By which I mean that feminists thinking you're rubbish has nothing to do with hating men in general, and everything to do wuth your own selves?
Astraea,
You sound so progressive here. Nice dialogue! Way to go! You probably claim that you value men’s opinion and then oooops, hypocrisy rears it head and you demonstrate your true colors.
Being raised on feminism, it was demanded of me that I be a sensitive male. Of course, the number of feminists who welcome the sensitive male is not as large as their progressive credentials would indicate, but I have no right to be disappointed.
We are told by so many feminists that there is no need for MRA’s cuz feminists represent our interests and yet for some strange reason I do not trust you to represent my interests since you refuse to listen to my point of view (and attack me for daring to express my point of view).
You demonstrate the negatives of matriarchy well, thanks for proving my point. I look forward to later meeting those who demonstrate the positives of matriarchy (those who are willing to actually listen to men’s point of view other than regurgitated feminist ideals out of the mouths of misandric males). I know a misandric male, I was raised to be one and succeeded at being one for far too long.
Babes and dudes, misandry isn’t the antidote for misogyny. The notion of rape culture is just cover for rape hysteria. College campuses have rape centers on most every one and the phone almost never rings. Your resources are well meaning, but not well dispersed (your rape center phones would ring more in the impoverished inner city than on the privileged college campuses (don’t give up the college rape awareness center, just expand to the rest of the community and make sure you have lines that come from the jails where most men are raped – if rape is bad, then rape of a male is bad, too)
The old native American saying is that you must “walk in my shoes a mile” before you can judge me applies here. There are few who have been able to walk in my shoes for a tenth of a mile before breaking out into tears. I do not spill my tears to you as of yet cuz you have already demonstrated your unwillingness to take seriously men’s story (being convinced we are all as powerful as Bill Gates, Sam Walton & George Bush, no empathy for any man, no mater how lowly his station, is ever reserved?). And why do people not see you as a compassionate progressive in the mold of the compassionate conservative?
Interesting thing is, if you reject so openly those who do not fight back (criticizing the matriarchy isn’t fighting back-I see the good in matriarchy, I also dare to see the bad), you will not be treated as well by those who do not mind attacking you back (it would behoove you to know the difference between those who are truly attacking you and those who simply dare to disagree with you). The battle of the sexes has been going on long enough – the war will only end when the talking starts. When the talking stops, that is when the war begins.
While I often wonder if I should spend my time writing MRA material (not just cutting and pasting I wrote these words myself – tis a compliment if you think them originated form the MRA movement). Twas a unique put down/insult, however and nice deflection (rather than respond to what I said, just insult everything I wrote (and show how miniscule your argument be).
I seek not to be an extremist in the gender wars (we have enough of those already on both sides). I have read enough books on misandry to be disappointed, although I have read some excellent ones as well (I still think it is necessary to find a middle ground that is not as hateful as many feminists and MRA’s can be).
MRA’s and feminists shouting back and forth at each other makes us all look like lunatics and fanatics. You claim we have all the power and we claim that most of us are as powerless as you and far less powerful than many of you. You refuse to dialogue and we will take our concerns elsewhere if our point of view is to be insulted so regularly.
I will gladly go away shortly, but not before suggesting that the progressives represented here do not seem anywhere near as progressive as they think they are. They just seem reactionary and judgmental.
Turtle, Boondogle, & others
The creativity of the feminist insult is pretty minimal. We are so ??????? we cannot get the ladies? Would be nice if you found an argument or even better if you could engage in dialogue.
Nearly every woman I have ever been with has gone on to higher education. My wife, at present, is working on her phd in a highly technical field (and I realize that few would give man any credit for being supportive of women in such endeavors, but many would be ready to blame me for holding her back if she didn’t succeed). I’ll try to handle this hypocrisy as I do with the rest of the hypocrisy when it comes to treatment of males. Just grin and bear it and never explain how I feel, cuz I know that we encourage males to be expressive of their feelings, but we sure do not want to know what those feelings are if they are anything but positive.
Men - tell us your feelings, get in touch with yourself and do not dare complain or we will attack you unmercifully.
Look, stop agreeing with yourself. It's weird.
Now, we get it - your very very desperate for female attention. Any female attention. So much so that you'll take even negative attention.
I feel for you, really. It must suck being that so unlikable,hateful and bitter that no one can stand to be around you for more than a few seconds or so.
But, there are better ways to get the attention you seek. One the most assured wasys it to stop being, you know, an unhinged bigot.
Now, wipe the rabid spittle from your chin, stop babbling incoherently and turn off the computer.
You really need some sun.
Turtle says:
“From a dude to a dude, you guys seriously need to learn how to cowboy up in life.”
This is a nice, insensitive, way (NOT!) of saying your feelings should be hidden and not expressed. Like I said before and I repeat myself because it is THAT important. We men have been taught, encouraged, forced to EXPRESS our feelings. and yet when we do, we are told to “Man up”, or “cowboy up”. To complain is unmanly. Your ability to be a part of the male of the species requires you to hide your true feelings (and this coming from supposed feminists?). Feminist hypocrites is what I see.
Well, let me tell you that to be a man nowadays means to be in touch with both a feminine and masculine side. That includes being able to cry and express ones feelings even if doing so leads to the insult that I am not manly enough. I dare to cry sometimes and I dare to not see myself as less than a real man cuz I dare to cry. If I refused to cry or express my feelings, you would probably insult me by suggesting I am not in touch with my feelings, right? Sure sounds like a double standard to me. Men should be able to express their feelings, but if they dare do so with regard to negative feelings, we will label him a non-man or question his fraternity in the brotherhood of men.
If you folks thought you were gonna prove me wrong about your hypocrisy, you have just proven me right, instead.
One of the reasons for men’s shorter lifespan is the encouragement by men & women to get men to act like men (to not complain, to take the dangerous activity to protect women and promote the furtherance of society). Men are goated into the dangerous activity (by feminists and non-feminist alike) and we are BLAMED for not letting women get involved in these largely dangerous activities that we would in many cases happily avoid ourselves, but someone is needed to do it. It would be nice, however, if those who espouse a gender neutral or gender fair society own recognize the bind that we as a society (feminists included apparently) put men in to get the most dangerous work done.
Sunless, when all argument fails (and when not attempting dialogue in any way, shape, or form), go straight to insult.
No wonder so few desire to be associated with feminists. There idea of intellectual pursuit, that of dialogue and reasoned argument, boils down to be insult after insult; much like the state of progressivism today.
It isn’t enough to rely on exaggerated and made up statistics to prove your point, you have to attack the person who disagrees with you to detract any attention from your logic which is full of holes?
if you disagree with me as a feminist, you must be a woman hater.
When we find misandry among the works of feminists, it is not contempt or hatred of the male, it is just art.
When they find even the minutest criticism of the female in works of art, it could not possibly be anything but misogyny (for criticism of the female is by its very definition, misogynistic).
I wish you women (and some of you men who run to the protection of your feminists sisters) would all cowgirl up and stop complaining as it is suggested that we MRA’s (or anyone sounding remotely like an MRA) do.
The interesting thing is that men far and wide are discovering hat they have been MRA’s for decades without even knowing it. I never knew that MRA’s existed even though I have been formulating these ideas for quite some time.
I have stayed as long as I did to counter the false accusation that I was a troll. I dared to counter your arguments with reason and mostly ignored the insults that took the place of reasoned argument. Finally I addressed the insults as no more reasoned argument or attempt at dialogue was forthcoming.
Feminists love to offer criticism of the patriarchy and yet perceive any criticism of the matriarchy as a PERSONAL attack or an attack on their ‘Sacred Cow’.
Sorry ladies (and men ready to sell men down the river in a heartbeat), fairness and equality demands that the matriarchy be shown the light of gender examination. Fairness dictates that just as patriarchy be examined from time to time to shed light on its negatives (and hopefully its positives as well), so, too, must the light be shown on matriarchy to see its positive attributes as well as its less attractive features.
Anything less than full disclosure would be neither equal nor fair and you all are progressive enough to be for fairness and equality, right? Or was that all a bunch of horse manure masquerading as shine and polish to make your egos feel good and an attempt to make others feel less so. Yes, we do have a system of organization that is lacking in civility and the rot is here as well as many other places. Holier than thou? Me thinks not. I think you are not greater than I or lesser than, but rather equal, if you will have me as such.
I am a man and I grant myself the right to be angry sometimes. I strive not to let that anger fester into hate and I refuse (like yourselves) to allow others to identify me wrongly. I examine myself regularly and I do not always like what I see, but I dare to look anyway and try to improve myself. I dare to listen to the stories that men have to tell of domestic abuse at the hands of the women in their lives and do not think women to be all bad creatures because of the violence that they perpetrate, but I will not maintain the fantasy that it is only the male of the species that has violent tendencies (that would just be bigotry).
*sighs* It's so sad to see someone chosen unhinged bigotry over common decency.
Is that ass still regurgitating in here?
Pretty impressive how he types all that stuff out one handed.
"Pretty impressive how he types all that stuff out one handed."
Well, the difficultly of typing one handed might be mitigated by the fact that he's just typing the same tired, long debunked, useless crap mras whiners always type.
There's not a single unique or individual thought among the lot of them.
Akhi, your posts are too long and boring to read anymore. But seriously dude, the good life is simple: (1) cowboy up, (2) live your own life, (3) don't begrudge others what they get in their own lives. Hillary Clinton would be a good example of that formula for you (especially the cowboying up part).
Yup, men who complain are just whiners.....Men have no legitimate concerns (and feminists will never be legitimate spokespersons for men as much as they declare they are for equaliity of both genders).
That is why I sum up feminism real simply...
men=bad
women=good
I'll leave so you can go back to preachin' to the choir and wondering why no one wants to talk to you at the waterin' hole...
Not all men, bigot, just you.
I was raised by lesbian feminists who had no clue what hurdles I had to face in life and ignored the difficulties I faced as a non-woman.
Akhi
Translation: The other kids tormented me (due to the patriarchy's insistence that teh gays be marginalized) and my mothers treated me like a regular person instead of the little prince the patriarchy tells me I am. I didn't get what was coming to me, dammit, and it's ALL WOMEN'S FAULT.
(I thought this thread was long dead until I saw recent comments on it. Talk about issues).
Did he really see flaws in our sacred cow? Let's get 'im. How dare he suggest our 'scared cow' (gynocentrism) has any flaws.
(pats self on back reminding self how 'progressive' she is).....
vote for hilary, she has the right equipment.....
I'll not vote for bilary, I've already noticed their misandric tendencies (I recognize that in this room misandric tendencies are not only ignored & denied, they are also encouraged).
Sorry to contradict you, but it is 'cowboying up' for a man to express his feelings on a feminist forum cuz there are few places where a man's expression of his feelings are less welcome.
Men: be sensitive and tell us your feelings so we can use them against you unmercifully and claim we are really just nice people at heart.
keep spreading the misandry
(by NOT reading these academic books)
Spreading Misandry: The Teaching of Contempt for Men in Popular Culture
Legalizing Misandry: From Public Shame to Systemic Discrimination Against Men
by Paul Nathanson (Author), Katherine Young (Author)
Refuse to admit discrimination against men and you can ruefully hide your bigotry in such a guileful way.
If you profit from misandrey raise your hand (knowingly or unknowingly). If you simply ignore misandry while pretending it does not exist then perhaps you are merely contemptuous of men. And if you enjoy your misandry like a fine glass of wine, than you may just be a full blown hater(mere contempt for men isn't enough to fill your glass of disdain).
and do not forget ladies, that although Now says...
"The simple fact is that every woman must be willing to be identified as a lesbian to be fully feminist." ?
-- National NOW Times, Jan.1988.
A little known tidbit here is that probably 75% of the ladies who munch the carpet go back to playing with the lollipop.
Yup, men who complain are just whiners
Actually, one of the marks of a grown-up is that said person realizes people who complain are just whiners.........
Whiners are rarely grown-ups.
"Expressing feelings" that said feminists are OMG so meen because they don't buy into your nonsense isn't cowboying up. It's whining about your entitlement issues.
Grow. up.
Whiners are rarely grown-ups.
oddjob | 04.25.08 - 9:09 am | #
A very accurate summation of the state of feminism judging by the contributors here.
Ahki, you are very civilizing society. I'd be pleased to know you anywhere.
"Castration of men, however, done by wandering hordes of women spurred on by the anti-male bloodlust given to them by feminist teachings, is a myth, one actively cultivated by people like Jessy who see, in feminism, a misandrist bogeyman."
There have been women who've attacked men in this way, yes. I won't say it's common, but it has happened, and, even when it happens in real life, there are some men and women out there who still find it humorous.
But I'm intrigued by your idea that something has to be common for it to be horrific, and, therefore, inappropriate for comedy. Most people don't throw newborns out of helicopters, and yet I don't think many people would find a joke about that very funny.
"Betty, you don't know anything about me, and therefore are unqualified to make any such denial [that I criticize men who equate feminism with Nazism]..."
"Except, you know, EVERY post you've ever made on this blog."
And? Please point to one that suggests I don't criticize certain MRAs as I do certain feminists. Good luck proving a negative.
"The difference being, of course, that Feminism is an actual movement, whereas MRAs as just a pack of crybabies with violently misognyistic tendencies."
According to Betty's own narrow-minded definition, you mean. You already announced on this thread that you're an "activist for men's rights." That's kinda sorta what "men's rights activist" means. See, they even contain the same words!
"You labor under the delusion that anyone cares what you do."
I care more about what people out in the real world think of me than I do
denizens of an online echo chamber.
Akhi: "Not wanting to drag women down to where most men are, but trying to bring most men up to where most women are. that is my idea of 'progressive'."
Astraea: "Now stop flooding the thread with your MRA crap, troll."
Akhi's comment is not one of a troll. Please learn what words mean before you use them.
Chinaberry: "Jessy & Akhi = two pathetic dudes who (1) get no respect from other guys in real life & (2) can't get any ladies in real life to make out w/ them."
Chinaberry, the more far-gone wing of the MRAs comprise those who dismiss feminists as women who can't get men to kiss/date/whatever them. That's an untrue stereotype, but you're equally guilty when you cast similar aspersions about Jessy and Akhi. And I keep seeing this admonition to "cowboy up." Is this what you tell feminists when they make a complaint on this board?
Instead of accusing Akhi of babbling, perhaps one of you could -- oh, I don't know -- ADDRESS one of his points.
You are all trolls, and your obsession with this thread is really pathetic.
I'll agree that the thread is pathetic.
men are welcome at the feminist love fest as long as they tow the party line.
Feminists do not have to tow any party line as we all know there are many types of feminism.
Actually, there is for many feminists a party line that cannot be crossed and this rigid inflexibility is what so many women object to (men are still not allowed to object to feminism without being whiners and not quite grown up yet.
If your definition of progressives is so conservative then I think i no longer want to be part of the club.
Oh, well tootles then.
Commenting by HaloScan
